Hypergamy and Black Women Marrying Up

Cross posted at Beyond Black and White...

I think my blog  is all about hypergamy and becoming a high quality woman, because it feels great to be one and because it makes you attractive to high quality men. I think that a lot of Beyond Black & White and BWE articles are about hypergamy too. So what it hypergamy?

Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as "marrying up") is the act or practice of marrying a spouse of higher caste or status than oneself.[1]...The term is often used more specifically in reference to a perceived tendency among human cultures for females to seek or be encouraged to pursue male suitors that are higher status than themselves, which often manifests itself as being attracted to men who are comparatively older, wealthier or otherwise more privileged than themselves or their current partners.[2] According to evolutionary psychologists, females have evolved a preference for higher status males because they offer their prospective children both "better" genes and greater resources, e.g. food and security. Men, who invest less in their children, have less reason to prefer mates with high social status. Some have even argued that males "marry-down" to ensure that their mates have a higher incentive to remain faithful. (source)

With non-Black women, hypergamy has to do only with wealth, class, privilege. Unfortunately, Black people and Black women have been devalued so much throughout recent history that we have more reason than most non-White women to marry up. Some Black women come from extremely poor and lower class backgrounds and marrying up would help them to leave that poverty. Due to us being Black, some people automatically place us below non-Black women so marrying up would place us at the same level or even above many non-Black women. Because some people devalue Black women they expect us to be satisfied with sub-par men who treat us way worse than they treat non-Black women. Some will even say we are only good enough for Black men so we should not date interracially. We are expected to accept this because supposedly don't deserve any better.

Well people who devalue Black women can go jump off a bridge because I won't let them tell me I deserve less than non-Black women! I'm not going to "settle" for less if non-Black women don't have to. I'm fully behind hypergamy or just marrying someone on your level. Personally for me, I'm not expecting someone to make more money than me, but I'm expecting someone better than what the mainstream or certain Black people expect for Black women. I expect a man who is attractive to me, has good character, has an education, a good career, no criminal record, no band of baby mamas, and a wedding ring for me before I have his children. I will not listen to outsiders who try to convince me and other Black women that we don't deserve those things and we should settle for less.

On my blog I have written about ways that I have tried to improve myself because if you want to marry up then you have to be a high quality woman (I also wanted to improve myself because I just wanted to be the best I could be). To me that doesn't mean a rich or upper class woman, it's about being well-rounded, having useful skills, being attractive, having good manners, and having good character--being the ideal and highly desirable woman. I felt that I needed to improve in some areas so I did it. I think that many women can improve their qualities so that they can marry up too. Some men support hypergamy and some do not. Men who are of high quality and status often condone female hypergamy because they are able to attract the best women, so it benefits them. They seek out high paying careers, work out, dress well, and drive expensive cars because it makes them attractive to women and makes them look better than other men. Because these men are highly valued then they are able to date and marry highly valued women.

On the other hand, men who are of lower quality are opposed to female hypergamy. They will try to convince women to put aside their desire for someone attractive, without a criminal record, with and education and career, without baby mamas, and the possibility of a marriage proposal. They want you to lower your standards and marry down. What's interesting is that these men fully support male hypergamy--dating and marrying women who are way out of their league! These men have little to offer but they go after highly attractive and successful women and feel they deserve these women because they are supposedly "nice guys". Many of these men are jaded because they have been passed over by high quality women due to their below average looks, character, communication skills, wealth, career, and other factors. Many of these men have joined groups to rant about how evil women are or groups focused on learning skills/tricks to get women to think they are of higher quality. This is where the Pick Up Artists (PUAs) come in.

PUAs are men who read and learn tips/tricks from other skilled PUAs about how to pick up women. The PUA masters use their tricks to get many women to sleep with them with no intention of having relationships. Many act as though they want a relationship just to get women into bed. I LOATHE these men and they can be downright misogynists! Their goal is to sleep with attractive women who would never sleep with them if it was not for their game personas and tricks. However, there are also socially awkward or less desirable men who use PUA lessons to make themselves appear more confident, funny, and attractive to women. To me that doesn't sound bad, in fact it sounds a lot like what I write about on my blog and many articles/books about what women can do to become more attractive (everything you have ever read/heard about how to attract/please/keep a man is pretty much female game theory. It teaches you what to do to get/keep a guy by doing things that you would not normally do). These men are trying to improve themselves so that they can get better women so I don't have a problem with that. In real life I have been approached by 4 PUAs. They knew just what to say and they didn't try to get me to sleep with them (2 did get my phone number. The first one told me all about PUAs. I figured out the second one was a PUA the next day. It turned out he was an expert and trained the next 2 guys who approached me!!!) . They were just charming and friendly and we had great conversations. The less experienced PUAs were awkward and shy. I was not attracted to them but they did not seem like bad guys.

So no, I would not look down on a guy who has read PUA material, it would just depend on what his attitude was towards women and what he was looking for. If he thinks women owe him sex and that we are all evil then obviously I want to avoid those guys like the plague. But if the guy thinks he is lacking in the looks and personality department and uses PUA tips/trick to appear more appealing, then that's fine with me (I would be a hypocrite if I looked down on that). I think that it's fine if women and men try to marry up as long as you are not creating an entirely false identity or lying just to get someone in bed or to the wedding chapel. Self-improvement is a great thing but use it for good not evil :)

Related Articles and Websites:

The hypergamy acceptance movement

Equality and the end of marrying up

Research reveals why today's women are marrying down

Marrying up is on it's way down

MPUA Pick up artist forum

PUA forums

What's wrong with PUA (a woman's opinion)

Must Read Article "Is No Strings Attached Sex' an Oxymoron?'

I just read a very important article on Hooking up Smart called, 'Is No Strings Attached Sex' an Oxymoron?' It details recent research about the psychological consequences of engaging in casual sex, something the casual sex advocates seem to conveniently overlook. By casual sex I mean sleeping with someone you barely know, or someone who has made no indication that they care about you or want to have a relationship with you (e.g., one night stands, sleeping with someone before getting to know them, just having sex with someone with no strings attached). I don't mean simply having sex with someone before you are married because at this point most people don't have a problem with that and I never said I did (as long as you are not too young and doing it with too many people etc.).

There is no such thing as truly safe sex and casual sex DOES have consequences, maybe not for everyone, but for enough people that they should be warned about it. Being informed means having enough information about the pros and cons of something so that you can make a well informed choice. Telling women that casual sex is great as long as you use protection is ignoring the potential cons...the psychological effects of casual sex.

"It’s clear that positive feelings from a hookup diminish over time. Also, unsurprisingly, women express far more regret and other emotional consequences than men. Still, it’s clear that about A QUARTER of women enjoy hooking up and cite no ill effects." This means that 75% of women either do not enjoy hooking up or 75% of women experience ill effects of hooking up! So should you pay more attention to the minority's experience (25%) or the experience of the majority (75%) when making a decision?

"Another study identified two types of sexual encounters that were particularly predictive of regret: engaging in penetrative intercourse with someone known less than 24 hours and engaging in penetrative intercourse with someone only once…Campbell (2008) found that men had stronger feelings of being “sorry because they felt they used another person,” whereas women had stronger feelings of “regret because they felt used.”
"
"In a study of 394 young adults followed across a university semester, those with more depressive symptoms and greater feelings of loneliness who engaged in penetrative sex hookups subsequently reported a reduction in both depressive symptoms and feelings of loneliness (Owen et al., 2011)...At the same time, participants who reported fewer depressive symptoms and fewer feelings of loneliness who engaged in penetrative sex hookups subsequently reported an increase in both depressive symptoms and feelings of loneliness (Owen et al., 2011)." It's basically saying that for this sample, women who feel depressed and lonely are the one's who find hookups enjoyable, which is what many of us already thought.

"Misperception of sexual norms is one potential driver for people to behave in ways they do not personally endorse. In a replication and extension of Lambert et al.’s (2003) study, Reiber and Garcia (2010) found that 78 percent of people overestimated others’ comfort with many different sexual hook-up behaviors, with men particularly overestimating women’s actual comfort with a variety of sexual behaviors in hookups." In other words, people, especially men, are assuming that most people are okay with hooking up, but they are overestimating this. They assume that most girls they meet will be okay with casual encounters and will act according to that assumption which is bad for the girls who don't want those encounters and are looking for love/relationships instead.

"People who hook up are more likely to have concurrent sexual partners (Paik, 2010b). Moreover, in a sample of 1,468 college students, among the 429 students who had engaged in oral sex, anal sex or vaginal intercourse in their most recent hookup, only 46.6 percent reported using a condom (Lewis et al., 2011)."

"Alcohol use has also been associated with a type of hookup: The greatest alcohol use was associated with penetrative sexual hookups, less alcohol use with nonpenetrative hookups, and the least amount of alcohol use occurred among those who did not hook-up (Owen, Fincham, & Moore, 2011)."... “Alcohol may also serve as an excuse, purposely consumed as a strategy to protect the self from having to justify hook-up behavior later (Paul, 2006).” So basically, if you need to be really drunk to hook up then maybe you shouldn't be doing it. If you wouldn't do it sober then you don't really want to do it.

"Men reached orgasm more often than women. In first-time hookups, 31 percent of men and 10 percent of women reached orgasm; in last relationship sexual activity, 85 percent of men and 68 percent of women reached orgasm." So if you really want to have enjoyable sex, it's better with a partner! Everyone knows this except that 25% who keeps saying hookups are great. Even they might not be having orgasms, maybe they think it's great because they feel less depressed and lonely after.

Very interesting article!

Being Soft is Pretty Sweet :)

Embed from Getty Images

I don't mind being soft, I actually like it. You have to be gentle with something soft. If you are soft then you don't have to put up with things other people have to. You can protect yourself and you don't need anyone's permission to do so. People don't expect you to tolerate harshness, you are excused. Your comfort and protection is of the utmost importance.

What I don't understand is how some women complain about being treated like unfeeling pack mules and yet continue to act like unfeeling pack mules. Why don't you just stop it? If everyone thinks you are strong, you can take everything, and you actually like drama and arguing...why do you play into those assumptions? Why do you complain over and over about mammys and mules and then proudly conform to those very stereotypes? Putting up with disrespect doesn't mean you are strong, it just means you have no problem with being treated badly and that's sad. Get your mind out of Blackistan! Why don't you tell people you need help, you can't handle everything, and you don't want to be on the defensive all the time? Why don't you just start acting softer? If you want something to change then you have to change something!

Well some women will say that acting softer will make them weak and vulnerable and people will take advantage of them. Understand I said soft--not stupid. Being soft means you actually raise your standards and require better treatment from others. You don't even give anyone the chance to harm you. You can be soft and pleasant and still say no, in fact, you don't have to argue or fight at all because you don't need to expose your precious mind to negativity. You do not have to tolerate being treated like a mule for one second because you are no mule! You are a lady and must always be treated as such.

Let others accept poor treatment because they somehow convinced themselves this proves they are "mature" and "real women". If they feel proud about how much abuse they can take, let them. In the meantime, enjoy the freedom, peacefulness, joy, and serenity of being soft and cherished :)

What Do Men Look for in Girlfriends & Wives?

This post is going to be entirely videos. I'll let some men and women explain what they think men want in girlfriends and wives. If you want men to care about what you want then you should care about what they want right?







Three more videos after the break...

An Alternative to the Angry, Strong, Independent Black Woman?

This video was a long time coming. When I began this journey to become feminine I had some of the same goals and ideas I have now. But I have gotten to know myself better and I can really describe the type of woman I want to be. I had to weed through the pop culture and feminist notions and figure out that I wanted to be a modern feminine Black woman. This is basically an EBW and she embraces a modern lifestyle in some ways but in other ways she is quite old fashioned.

This is who I am. This is being liberal and conservative. This is being an individual who is different from many modern women yet the same as many traditional women and women of the past. I don't reject or accept everything from the past because the past was not perfect. I don't reject or accept everything modern because modern ideas and values are not perfect either and they have yet to be proven beneficial in the long term. I feel happy and more secure in my choice to become a modern feminine woman. I have learned so much that I am not as easily swayed about my choices as I once was. I do not feel that my values, goals, and choices are mistakes that I will regret later. I have decided who I want to be and I'm happy with the progress I have made towards becoming that person.

The video below may be controversial to some but it is honest. This is who I want to be and these are my beliefs. Basically if anyone objects to anything they are free to use Ezvid to express their own views, free media is awesome!!!  :)

New EBW YouTube Videos :)

I just made some videos for YouTube. These are just image videos because enough of my thoughts are already on this blog. I think I'll turn all of my photo posts into videos. It wasn't hard at all. I used a free program called Ezvid and then added annotations using YouTube. I think that the difference between these women and the women we see in the media will be very striking. These women look highly desirable, approachable, friendly, kind, and like high quality women. These are my fashion and beauty role models.  I hope you enjoy these :)

Prude-shaming, Love-shaming, Marriage-shaming, and Tradition-shaming

Based on my readings of feminist blogs, women's blogs, media messages, and conversations with certain people I think that there is such thing as "prude-shaming", "love-shaming", "marriage-shaming", and "tradition-shaming". What all four of these acts have in common is that they shame people for doing something that was once considered the norm in the recent past (10-15 years ago). People are being shamed for things that were the norm when I was growing up. A lot of this shaming is based on the theoretical ideas of certain intellectuals or activist groups. Unfortunately what these people are endorsing has not been tested enough in Western societies or many other societies for them to say that they are "good for society" and will not cause problems in the future. There is a big difference between theory and practice and sometimes ideas that sound good on paper are disasterous in real life. Of course traditional viewpoints and lifestyles are not perfect either but at least we can compare times in the past to the present and see the problems that have arisen since non-traditional lifestyles and beliefs have become more popular.

Prude-shaming: This done to shame someone who is uncomfortable with or disgusted by a certain level of sexual activity. It may be used when someone is against sex before marriage, promiscuity, pornography, strippers, prostitution, open relationships or specific sex acts that they think are disgusting. The prude is told "don't judge" something to be disgusting or undesirable when that is exactly how they feel. Prudes are people with a lower threshold for disgust and prude-shamers have a higher threshold. Therefore, a prude could be disgusted by a specific behaviour while a prude-shamer would have a neutral or positive reaction. The prude-shamer then judges him- or herself as "correct", "enlightened", "open-minded" or in some way "better" than the prude and this is used to justify their shaming of the prude. If the prude tries to shame the prude-shamer or people who engage in a given sexual practice then they are called a "slut-shamer" or "sex-shamer" (e.g., Jenna Marbles incident).

The problem with prude-shaming is that people are made to question their disgusted feelings and values and pressured to condone things that they actually don't like. In the worst case, people will engage in behaviours they don't like because everyone else says those behaviours are acceptable and they are "abnormal" if they don't agree (the basis for peer/media pressure).

Love-shaming: This is done to shame someone who believes in love, is looking for love, or who spends a lot of time pursuing and thinking about romantic relationships. This is done to men and women who make any effort to find a romantic partner (e.g., flirting, going out to meet people, approaching people, online dating, matchmakers, reading dating books etc.). These people may be ridiculed and told love doesn't exist, relationships are for suckers, it's better to be single, you are so desperate, you must have low self-esteem if you need someone so bad, all you need is yourself, etc. They are discouraged from looking for love and told that there is something wrong with them that needs to be fixed (e.g., judging them by saying they have low self-esteem, daddy issues, no life, desperate, no goals, no career focus, etc.). They are told that love is just something in books and movies and  they are judged to be being foolish, naive, silly, immature for caring so much about it. Women who appear to be very concerned with relationships are ridiculed for not having any depth (e.g., Taylor Swift is ridiculed for singing so much about relationships). Love-shaming is often done by people who have never experienced love, those who have loved and lost, and those who prefer relationships without love (e.g., casual sex relationships). 

In the worst case, people will give up on finding love, settle for whatever relationship they can get, or allow others to dictate the terms of relationships (e.g., I will use your body but I will not love you, and you will accept this because that's a normal relationship and love doesn't exist).

Marriage-shaming: This is done to shame someone who wants to get married, thinks highly of marriage, or thinks more people should get married. These people are told statistics about how many marriages end in divorce and about couples and singe people who are very happy without being married. They are told that marriage is an oppressive and antiquated practice based on the patriarchal ownership of women and has nothing to do with real love. Marriage-shaming often takes the form of warning people not to get married (especially men) and that marriage ruins relationships. Marriage-shamers love to tell people that they grew up in or know people who grew up in single-parent households who turned out fine so there is no need to get married. Marriage-shaming is frequently done when someone criticizes others for not getting married before having children or blames the decline of marriage for any problem in society. Marriage-shamers often uphold non-traditional relationships (i.e., relationships that are not marriages between 1 man and 1 woman) as being just as acceptable to society, healthy, fulfilling, common, and beneficial to children.

In the worst case, people will not ask for marriage when that is what they really want. Or they will stay with partners who refuse to marry them (because the partner doesn't really want to commit and gives normalized reasons why marriage is unnecessary). These people will feel disappointed and that they were not good enough to marry (e.g., thinking they will never get married because they are Black women :( ). People will not feel the need to get married, marriage rates will further decline, and being unmarried will become the norm. 

Tradition-shaming: Prude-shaming, love-shaming, and marriage-shaming can also be considered types of tradition-shaming. Tradition-shaming occurs when someone is shamed for a belief or lifestyle that is traditional and has been acceptable for a long time. Disgust with promiscuity and certain sex acts is traditional and present in many religions. Belief in love and having romantic relationships is also traditionally accepted (but in some places arranged marriages are just as/even more acceptable). Belief in marriage is of course very traditional all around the world and in many religions. Tradition-shaming also occurs when anyone is shamed for endorsing and embracing a traditional feminine appearance, traditional feminine activities (e.g., cooking, sewing), or gender roles. Tradition-shaming is often applied to people who try to maintain their cultural roots or those who are religious. Tradition-shamers judge that there is something wrong with those who uphold tradition and call those people old-fashioned, brainwashed, non-thinking, closed-minded, afraid of change, sexist, zealots etc. because they are not following newer trends or beliefs. Tradition-shamers believe in modern beliefs and lifestyles and judge them to be superior to those of the past.

In the worst case, people will abandon their beliefs and traditions in favor of modern lifestyles that have no track record of being better for most people or beneficial to society . Instead of doing or asking for what they want people will suppress these desires and do/accept whatever other people say is "the new normal" (e.g., Many men and women are settling for just "hooking up" when they really want relationships because the media keeps saying traditional dating is dead. Women will settle for not getting married because the media says marriage is becoming rare. Women will accept open relationships if the media says open relationships can be healthy and satisfying. Women will put up with being "baby mamas" if everyone says it's acceptable and fathers are unnecessary).

The purpose of this post was to show that shaming goes both ways. Progressive people shame and judge conservative and traditional people for their views. This shaming and judging has become very prominent with the media, intellectuals, and activism groups (e.g., feminists) who become outraged when traditional people shame and judge them back. They make up terms like "slut-shaming" and "fat-shaming" when someone states their being promiscuous or very overweight is unattractive for them or romantic partners they are seeking. People are shamed for having opinions that are not super liberal and modern. Just as these modern thinkers call traditional people closed-minded, small thinking, or brainwashed, traditional people call modern thinkers irresponsible, unrealistic, lacking self-control, and brainwashed by the media and activists!

Who is the real free-thinker with strong beliefs that will not be swayed by the opinions of others? Is it the modern person who follows every trend and thinks we should just accept and adapt to whatever other people choose to do? Or is it the traditional person who compares the past to the present, thinks some things in the past were better, and fights against the loud voices of those who want to abandon everything we have learned in the past? Traditional people have their books and theories and modern/progressive people have their books and theories. Both groups JUDGE their views to be better than the other group and they both SHAME the other group for their views.

I think it is abnormal to not have any opinions or values and people who say "I never judge" and "I accept everything and everyone" are lacking self-awareness. They are unaware of their biases and preferences but you can pick these things out by looking at the way they live and the choices they make for themselves. Beware of people who say they support lifestyles that they have never engaged in and have NO DESIRE to engage in. Ask them why because that will reveal their biases and preferences. This is a big red flag! For example, some feminists say they will support any woman (including a friend's) sexual lifestyle even though they have never engaged in that lifestyle, and have no desire to do so. If they have no desire to engage in the lifestyle under any circumstance then they do not really approve of that lifestyle! If they can not list reasons why they think that lifestyle is valuable, good, justified etc. then they do not approve of that lifestyle! If under different circumstances they would not engage in that lifestyle (e.g., no one would find out, no danger, trusted people, nothing to lose), then they do not approve. I liken this to you asking someone if doing A is a good idea, they say sure, you then ask them to do A with you and they say "No way I'm not crazy!" These people will NEVER give you honest and good advice about important life choices because they will nod their heads and support ANYTHING! Should I quit school? Sure! Should I be a stripper? Sure! Should I join the circus? Sure! Should I sleep with the entire football team? Sure! Do you see how useless and potentially destructive that is? They either don't think or they don't care to protect you from harm. True friends and family members would never do this. They would talk to you about your decision, make sure you were informed about the pros and cons, and discuss alternatives. Don't bother seeking approval for people with no standards, you may as well talk to a brick wall.

Are Feminists Against Marriage?

There as an interesting conversation on another blog about a horrible new reality show starring a (c)rapper and his 10 baby mamas and 11 children. Yes you heard that right, a show about a promiscuous man who constantly impregnates 17-19 year old women who all live in a house with him! Well I made a comment that many feminists are against marriage and would see this arrangement as ideal especially if the man went away. Someone accused me of speaking "nonsense" and ordered me to give her sources to support my argument. Well I posted two videos but that was all I was willing to do because I'm not that stranger's slave and she should be empowered enough to do a simple Google search (it's funny but when I posted a video of feminist quotes she actually refused to view it even though she was the one who asked for sources!). It's a waste of time trying to educate such people, she doesn't even know what some members of her own group think.

Would I say I'm anti-feminist, no since I do agree with many of the things they do and have done. But I have the right to talk about the things I don't agree with. I thought about calling myself an egalitarian but after reading a bit about it I don't think it describes me either because I don't believe all lifestyle choices are equal, I think some people are better at some jobs/roles than others, some people earn privileges and prestige, and some people (e.g., children) can't handle the same rights and responsibilities as others. If I say I'm an egalitarian then I would be placing myself with the same people who have no problem with the (c)rapper's lifestyle, being promiscuous, taking drugs, getting black out drunk, not taking responsibility etc. and "respects" everyone else's lifestyle. That is so not me!

Other people often argue that people shouldn't bother to get married because so many marriages end in divorce. When I hear that I always think, "so what if they end in divorce?" I mean, a lot of people fail or have to drop out of university, but I didn't let that stop me from going and trying. If I had listened to the people saying school was a waste of time, so many people fail etc. then I would not have gotten my degrees. A lot of people are let go from their jobs so should I not bother to work? Some people never get into their desired career so should they not even try? Many people change careers 2-3 times in their life and may only stay in a job for 10 years, so was that a total waste of time? Didn't those jobs fulfill their needs for a period of time? Even if I get married and it ends after 20 years, so what? 20 years is a long time and I want that experience. In twenty years I will be 54 and right now I'm not thinking about what my life will be like at 54, I'm focused on my present experiences and my desire for present happiness. Even though up to 1/3 marriages in Canada end in divorce prior to 30 years, who says I won't be in the other 2/3 that don't divorce? Some people let fear of failure prevent them from doing things in life, they may be underachievers, yet when it comes to marriage people act like these people are brave to not get married out of fear of divorce.

Well back to the feminist arguments, these may be considered "radical feminists" but many of them are well known, they have written books I have actually heard of, these books are often read in universities, and many of these women are lecturers, professors, and heads of women's studies departments. So I think I'm just going to post links to articles so that you can read and decide for yourself if there are some feminists who are against marriage and would rather have women become single mothers with no involvement from the fathers. Get mad at them, not me because I'm just providing links to things they have said that are readily available on the Internet and in their writings.

I did find one interesting quote stating that feminists need to tone down on the anti-marriage rhetoric because it puts them at odds with  liberal feminists and most other women...good advice. Let's add anti-marriage messages to my list of other reasons why I can't support Third Wave feminism and even some earlier wave feminism (also on the list: the ignoring of non-White women, man-hating statements, promoting promiscuity as liberating and empowering, endorsing single motherhood as though it's easy, and the rejection and ridicule of feminine women, women who try to look attractive, women who wear makeup and dresses, women who want to have relationships with men, women who would rather be stay at home moms than career women, women who don't want to compete with men, and women who don't want to act and look like men).

Articles about anti-marriage statements made by feminists:

• Marriage and family: an ideological background: EXCELLENT! Apparently nowadays believing in marriage and having intact nuclear families is "conservative" when it used to just be "normal". Interesting that some feminists, such as Betty Friedan of The Feminine Mystique and Germaine Grier, were against marriage and their work was used to argue against marriage but later on they changed their minds! Some women spouting this stuff may end up changing their minds after millions of women listened and acted on their teachings.
• Who wants to marry a feminist? Very interesting! When some feminists got married some other feminists called them traitors. 
• Young, feminist, and...married
• Can a person be a feminist and still believe in marriage?  Really good except the last two paragraphs. "Moderate, mainstream feminists have long rejected this animus against marriage; the vast majority of such feminists either are married or intend to marry...Radical feminists...seek to undermine the nuclear family of married father, mother, and children, which they label the “patriarchal family.” As feminist leader Betty Friedan has warned, this anti-marriage agenda places radical feminists profoundly at odds with the family aspirations of mainstream feminists and most other American women."
• Criticism of marriage on Wikipedia (there is a part about feminist criticisms)
• The case against marriage
• Desperate feminist wives: Article describes large study showing that housewives are happier than women who have to work. "But the most interesting data may be that the women who strongly identify as progressive—the 15 percent who agree most with feminist ideals—have a harder time being happy than their peers, according to an analysis that has been provided exclusively to Slate. Feminist ideals, not domestic duties, seem to be what make wives morose. Progressive married women—who should be enjoying some or all of the fruits that Freidan lobbied for—are less happy, it would appear, than women who live as if Friedan never existed." WOW!
• Straw feminists setting fire to marriage material: This is a woman giving her strong opinion.

Cultural Appropriation and Fetishizing

I have grown very weary of Black people claiming cultural appropriation and fetishizing. Here is a definition of cultural appropriation from Wikipedia:

Cultural appropriation is the adoption of some specific elements of one culture by a different cultural group. It describes acculturation or assimilation, but can imply a negative view towards acculturation from a minority culture by a dominant culture. It can include the introduction of forms of dress or personal adornment, music and art, religion, language, or social behavior. These elements, once removed from their indigenous cultural contexts, can take on meanings that are significantly divergent from, or merely less nuanced than, those they originally held.

Appropriation practice involves the 'appropriation' of ideas, symbols, artefacts, image, sound, objects, forms or styles from other cultures, from art history, from popular culture or other aspects of man made visual or non visual culture. Anthropologists have studied the process of cultural appropriation, or cultural borrowing (which includes art and urbanism), as part of cultural change and contact between different cultures.

This post was inspired by an article called Dolce and Gabbana 2013- Racist or overblown. I just don't see the point of these terms in 2012 where people of various ethnicites travel all over the world and share their cultures with everyone through trade and media. Haven't people been sharing their culture with outsiders for centuries? Haven't people of various cultures been adopting the cultural items, ideas, and teachings of outsiders for centuries? That just cultural assimilation! So why is it that in this day of age where different cultures have more access to outside cultures than ever before that Black people are freaking out about it? I think current viewpoint on the issue is very liberal (e.g., relax, it's not a big deal, live and let live, let's accept everything that's good) and very conservative on this matter (e.g., it's you making yourself miserable not society, you are seeing racism everywhere, you are too sensitive)!

It's like in order for a non-Black person to wear something considered "Black or African" then they are required to take a Black history course and join the NAACP! They must also have Black friends, think Black people are beautiful, and employ Black people. Why does everything have to be so serious when it comes to interacting with Black people? Why do you place so many expectations on others when you don't have to do the same amount of work to get along with them? Like I have said before, this is Black people once again acting like they need special care because they are fragile, wounded, and victims of everyone else. In order to associate with them or their culture outsiders must have special training and work harder than they have to with other people. Are you victims or are you strong and resilient? If you are a mixture of both then act like it and admit your strengths and vulnerabilities instead of stating your are completely powerless or powerful because you are telling people how to treat you! Victims get help and pity, the strong are expected to handle everything alone, but a "normal person" is not entirely powerless or powerful all the time so they can be independent and still get help and special care when needed.

This is why outsiders say it is difficult to get along with Black people and they are "too sensitive" because that is exactly what many Black people are telling them! I am not doing it but other Black people are adamantly telling others "you have to be very careful with us because we are so hurt and easily hurt by almost everything you do (including when you style your hair like us)! It sends the message to non-Black people that maybe it's just easier not to deal with Black people because they are never satisfied with any of their attempts to be inclusive or accepting and they are so easily hurt (ironic since Black people are often called strong and many embrace the term). For example, the producers of the new Nina Simone biopic may decide to never do a film focusing on a BW again because they cast EBW Zoe Saldana in the title role. Although White actresses like Charlize Theron and Nicole Kidman can transform their appearances to play less attractive women (and win Oscars), Black people are too sensitive and delicate to accept that. No, they insist on casting a less attractive actress and they have no concern with talent or box-office draw. Another example is when non-Black people wear the image of Black people on their clothing, it is often interpreted as mocking or racist when images of many races are shown on clothing. Let's not forget whenever non-Black people embrace music created by Black people. Some Black people will almost shove this music down people's throats (insist they are racist or elitist if they don't...seriously) while others call it cultural appropriation when these people finally accept their culture (e.g., outrage at Japanese and White people embracing hip hop, jazz, blues, and reggae culture).

A non-Black man is not allowed to be attracted to Black women without it being called a fetish. Here is the definition of a fetish (doesn't sound bad to me at all):

1. an object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency. 2. any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion: to make a fetish of high grades. 3. Psychology any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.


But for some reason, instead of seeing dark skin or other features many Black women have (e.g., full lips, full behinds) as comparable to other attractive feminine features (e.g., large chests, curves, softness, long hair) they call this a fetish that is somehow wrong!? By calling attraction for BW a fetish you are teaching the world that there is something wrong with liking BW and men who do are strange and deviant! Some will say that this is the point and it's called a fetish so that non-Black men will not be attracted to BW, and some BW are actually encouraging this! I would think that if BW want to be accepted as equals to other women then they would want to be found universally attractive. I would think that they would want it to seem perfectly understandable and non-deviant for someone to find them beautiful.

Why does this all irritate me? I guess because these behaviours are working against something I see as a positive thing. Unless something is accepted by the majority then it will not be seen as normal. So unless we react "normally" to non-Black people accepting Black culture and BW then this acceptance will never be seen as normal! People strive to be normal and negative reactions to their behaviour may cause them to reject us. If liking BW or aspects of Black culture continue to be seen as forms of rebellion or something to scare parents this will not do us any favors. It's time to stop holding on so tight to "Black culture" because the only way to gain acceptance is by allowing others to accept you without making them regret it afterward.

What some people need to do is really examine themselves and why they get so angry when non-Black people try to accept them or aspects of their culture. I think there are deep personal issues being triggered:

1. For one, people who hate non-White people and see them as the enemy will object to this acceptance. They will see it as a treat because they see anything their enemy does as a treat. These people will always be complaining.
2. Others are very attached to Black culture because it is their escape from the mainstream, therefore they think they will be lost if their culture becomes mainstream (i.e., they feel that their culture and uniqueness is all they have and without it they are nothing). This to me may be self-imposed limitations, a fear of being open to change and new things, and a sign that you don't have enough going on for you. 
3. There are also some people who really want to be accepted but they are afraid of getting hurt (i.e., they don't think they are good enough so they are skeptical others who accept them or what they like). So they insist on more proof that they are accepted so that they can be sure of it (e.g., you can't just be my friend/date, you have to disavow your White privilege too and feel guilty about everything White people have ever done. You can't just have a Black actress in your film/show, you have to celebrate Black love and discuss racism too. You can't just have a Black model, she has to look like Alek Wek or India Arie). I think that this is an insecurity issue because the Black person does not believe that they are really accepted so they insist on extreme levels of 100% acceptance and perfect understanding of the Black experience (which is impossible even for most Black people).  
4. Some Black people I think are too attached to "being cool" rather than being accepted by the mainstream so they want their culture to be exclusive (i.e., only some people are allowed into the Black culture club and they decide who gets in). This leads them to basically be culture snobs even when the things they cherish the most are considered harmful or tacky by the mainstream anyway. I also see this as a sign of entitlement, yes ENTITLEMENT because you are allowed to do things while other people can't. You have a special status where you are free to like, dress, and act in certain ways but others can't, and you expect this freedom to be respected. You also embrace things from other cultures but have a list of reasons why you are allowed to do so (e.g., being oppressed, racism, pressure to conform etc.). This again is feeling entitled to special treatment. If you like something for a reason, then others may like it for the same reasons...accept it instead of seeing it as a threat. You can't complain about being prevented from doing things because you are Black if you prevent non-Black people from doing things just because they are not Black!

I think that I'm starting to have a negative view of many of the theories that have come out of AA academics and research. Since the U.S. is the largest producer of race theories regarding Black people they are seen as the authority and no one questions it. But others have criticized that it always makes Black people out to be powerless victims. I do not feel like a powerless victim! The academics, similar to many Black blogs, also make it seem like we have to be angry activists all the time and that we must be constantly fighting against something. They trace everything back to slavery so that our anger about slavery is constantly being triggered. These AA teachings have become so prevalent that Black people online know many of the theories and trace every incident and aspect of their current existence to slavery. I wonder if people of other cultures do this and if it is self-defeating? With all the self-help talk about how important it is to stay in the present and plan for the future is it beneficial for the average Black person to constantly look back? I'm not saying forget, but is it helpful in any way to link your whole existence back to slavery? That's a good idea for a study :) I constantly hear people reason that "we must look at the causes in order to find solutions", but on a personal level I do not believe this is necessary at all. To find solutions in your own life you do not have to spend years examining your birth events, childhood, grandparents lives etc., you can just examine your current circumstances and find ways to improve in the present. Historical research may be important for societal change but totally unnecessary for personal change (e.g., your personal changes don't need to be run past the government or a committee, laws don't need to be created, a proposal doesn't have to be written, you don't need a grant etc.).

So what does this have to do with femininity? Well, if you get angry all the time about race then you will appear mean, unhappy, and argumentative to others like the stereotypical Angry Black Woman. It is feminine to be accepting and open to others rather than closed off, suspicious, and hostile. It is also against your best interest of being a desirable woman to all men when you insult your admirers by calling them fetishists and insisting they are deviant and defective for finding you attractive. If you want to be loved and admired you need to let other people love and admire you! A lady knows how to take a compliment. I also think that non-Black women will respect you more if they stop seeing you as the unattractive friend or as no competition for their men. Personally, I'm never going to use the term "fetish" in relation to liking BW or any race of woman ever again.


Related Articles:
Cultural Appropriation on Wikipedia (interesting!)
Cultural appropriation: Homage or insult? (see, if one focuses on the past and power differentials then assimilation by the mainstream will always cause negative feelings. This is the individual's personal anger at the mainstream)
Race preference or race fetish?
When does a racial preference become a fetish?
Top 10 fetishes from AskMen.com (risque language lol. What's interesting is that this is almost a list of things you can wear and do to make men instantly attracted to you...there are some I wouldn't do though...ever)

Volume Dating Versus Serial Dating

You have to read this article, Every Woman Needs a Gaggle of Men. I know it's just one article (I am reading a bunch right now and will post below), but it highlights something I have been feeling about this whole 'volume dating/date multiple men' thing. I had a suspicion that these multiple dating advocates tend to be okay with casual sex without monogamy and sex with more than one person at a time. This supposed 'sex counselor' (who knows what his training is) is okay with sex without monogamy, sex with multiple partners, and even says marriage is not for everyone! He's one of those who has thrown traditional dating, marriage, and life goals to the wind because he knows times have changed for everyone so we just have to accept the decline (i.e., everyone is doing it so you should too). He is advocating hook-up culture when many women (and men) say they don't actually like the culture but they conform because everyone else seems to be doing it. UPDATE: I just read the comments from the article and the majority of people reacted just as negatively as I did.

So how can someone like me, who only believes in sex with one person and wants marriage, listen to someone like that? This is one of those 'anything goes' radical liberal types that I am not. He says that it's a post-dating world but I beg to differ because this seems to be a Western, feminist, male fantasy sort of thing while traditional people (including many non-White people) don't believe in that. He makes it seem like what he advocates is the norm but it isn't. For many guys, if you told them you were sleeping with someone else they would no longer see you as girlfriend material. Others, as you know, get weird when they know you are dating someone else so it could actually ruin your chances with someone by dating other people. This expert is telling women to date and sleep around believing that eventually these women will date and sleep with enough guys and find their match. That assumes that the women don't get sick of it and end up settling just like women who dated and slept around less. It also assumes that one of these guys will actually want to settle down with a volume dater who has been around the block. It assumes that these women only stop this because they find their best match and that match also chooses them but I haven't read scientific proof this is the case. 

One problem I have with this multiple dating thing is what proof do they have that it actually works? I've read a few anecdotes where a woman says she dated multiple men, it helped her figure out what she wanted, then she was able to find her best match. But aren't there women who already know what they want based on long-term relationships or dating a few men? Also, how does the anecdotal person know that things would not have gone the same way if she was totally single when she met Mr. Right? Maybe, if she was more selective in her dates then every date would be with a potential Mr. Right instead of guys who obviously were not good matches from the beginning. The point is that there are no scientific studies proving this is a better method and their ideas are no more valid than those who advocate sex only with monogamy. Patti Stranger from Millionaire Matchmaker advocates dating 3 guys but no sex (at all) without monogamy. She knows that many women feel bad if they give up sex without monogamy so she advocates against it. Sex makes the relationship deeper so it's hard for the woman to date other guys. Only a study can determine if more women are happier after serial/traditional dating versus multiple dating and who feels they found their best match. 

I think that things can be looked at in different ways, maybe depending on if you are a positive or negative person. I tend to see the negatives so if I were to date 20 guys, three dates each, if none of them wanted me to be their girlfriend, and if none of them fell in love with me then my self-esteem would be way worse than if I was just rejected by 3 men! If I was at my best and most charming with 20 guys I would expect one of them to choose me! I don't want more chances to be rejected. I read another article about how women can just enjoy the experience of connecting with these people. I'm just not like that, I would rather have a conversation with someone I like rather than someone who I don't (I'd rather watch TV or blog instead). So when I'm on a date with a guy I'm not attracted (and there isn't enough chemistry to be friends) I feel like I would rather be doing something else. I just don't enjoy talking with people I don't want a relationship or friendship with. I consider these conversations to be investments and I'd rather not spend my best jokes, insights, and stories on someone I don't plan on seeing again. I'm just not that person who enjoys talking for the sake of it. I prefer having deep relationships rather than many superficial ones so I'd rather have a handful of close friends than 20 not so close ones. Dates with Mr. Wrongs is tedious but dating Mr. Right is not.

Also, how do these multiple daters know that the man they married was their "best match"? It could be that compared to the other 20 men the anecdotal woman dated, Mr. Right was just the best of the bunch and got along with her the best. How is that any different from a woman dating 3 guys serially and then picking #4 because he was the best one? You don't have to actually date every type of guy to figure out what you want. You can learn from other women's stories, friendships and working relationships, family members, films, books, etc. I'm sure that women with few dating experiences still have an idea of what they want. Furthermore, there is so much advice about how to feel happy and satisfied with what you have instead of thinking that what you have isn't good enough. Maybe women who serial date are able to do this with their Mr. Right but it is very difficult to do this when you are dating multiple, different men over a long period of time. The multiple dater is always expecting that they can find someone better but what is the guarantee that there is someone better? I'm not talking about someone who dates jerks, I mean someone who has dated maybe 10 employed, nice, attractive, and great guys who any woman would want.

Here's a quote, ""When you date just one guy, you might feel pressured to commit, even if you’re not ready,” she says. “If you see two men, there’s often this unspoken need to choose between them. But three guys tend to balance each other out, like a tripod.” I think the most important thing is that it's THE MAN who decides whether to commit or not! I have not read anywhere that these anecdotal women were asked for commitment from more than one man and they chose to say yes to the best one. For all we know these women dated 20 men, they didn't want 10 of them and 9 did not want to commit, so they said yes to the 20th one, the only one who actually wanted them! Since this is a new phenomenon there are no long-term studies showing that these volume daters have better or longer marriages either. This is really another example of people advocating for something that theoretically seems better but there is no real proof that it is! No I am not saying that it is good for women to settle for the first man they date or for whoever chooses them. I think that nowadays it is fine to date more than one man before you get married. But I will not believe that women who date more before marriage end up with better matches than those who don't without proof of this. Also, I won't believe that women with many sexual partners don't suffer negative consequences because of it, or that it doesn't interfere with their relationship and marriage prospects. 

So in terms of volume dating my stance is that I will only continue to see men who I like because I won't go through the motions of more than one date with men I am not attracted to just for the sake of having dates (why continue unsatisfying relationships?). I will not pursue men and when I find one I like I will make myself less available (e.g., won't go on dating sites as much) but I won't cut the other men off until I discuss that with the potential Mr. Right.  If he has a problem with it he will have to put up with it, commit to me, or move on. If he is worth it I won't have a problem giving up the other guys but a discussion must be had. I will also follow Patti Stranger's advice of no sex without monogamy because that is more consistent with my values. 

It's hard to get more than one man interested in you that you actually want, and these volume dating articles make it seem like it's easy and we are purposefully avoiding it! Like the article above said, these women are dating men who don't have what they want but they are keeping them around to fulfill specific needs...they are dating men they know are not good enough! I ONLY go on second dates with men who I would actually want to have a relationship with who have everything I want. Furthermore, these men have feelings too and they can tell if you aren't into them and it makes me wonder why they stick around. Some may just want to be friends, especially friends with benefits and this article encourages that! I mean these articles act like the men don't have feelings! Are these men paying for dates and spending time with women who KNOW they don't want them? I think that is just as unethical as men saying they love and will commit to women in order to sleep with them. Unless these women let the men know that they don't think a relationship will happen then they are using these men. This is why some guys are mad a women for leading them on. I have no problem with being friends and seeing what happens (with nothing physical) but both parties should know what's going on. Just imagine your're a guy, going on dates for 2 months (him paying) and when you ask for commitment the woman says no...why in the world was she dating you if she didn't want you??? If you are sure you don't want someone you should let them go instead of leading them on. 

For me I have NEVER been able to date two or more quality men, who I have chemistry with, at the same time. I find most of my dates on online dating sites and recently in a networking group. I ONLY go on dates with men who I am attracted to physically, have a degree, live nearby and plan to stay here, are looking for a relationship, not too young or old, and seem nice. I don't get approached by tons of men who meet this criteria. Out of the last 6 dates I've gone on recently I was only physically attracted to 1 (four did not look as good as they did in photos). There was no chemistry with 4 because I was not attracted to them and there wasn't enough friendship chemistry for me to want to stay in touch with them (they were a bit awkward or dull in my opinion. I have met 2 men recently who aren't even straight, or close to my age, but they were so fun and we got on so well I want to keep them as friends. So it's not that I wasn't friendly). I was not attracted to 1/6 but I would like to be his friend. I have gone on multiple dates with another 1/6 but he takes things slow and does not want to commit. I have an upcoming date with a guy I had amazing chemistry with but who went away and has now returned. I have never had so much chemistry with a man and he says and does exactly what I need. There are also two very attractive men who have my number but I don't know if they want dates, to be friends, or if they are even single so I can't even count them yet. So that leaves me with 2 potentials, 1 who hasn't chosen me and 1 just starting up again out of 11 men I have recently met (including the two friends) and that was a lot of time spent! I only met these men online or networking and not at work, school, clubs, bars, or just randomly on the street. If I end up dating 3 men I actually like at the same time I will be very surprised!

Related Articles:

*The biggest mistake women make when dating (this is way less objectionable than the one posted above)
*Volume dating (pretty good and has responses to some of my doubts)
*Volume dating?
*How to date multiple guys without being shady

*Is it okay to date more than one man at once? (lol she uses the marketing metaphor that I have used in previous posts). This advice also disagrees with the first article and says don't have sex too easily. Here's a quote:

The principles of the game:

1. You are a company.

2. You are the company’s only salesman, marketer and advertiser.

3. Men are your company’s customers and they make their buying decisions based upon the goods you produce (i.e. yourself); in other words, you have to present the best product with not only the best structural quality, but also the best packaging, and advertising possible. (You must have the best possible inner and outer selves.)

4. Your personal style differentiates your company from all the others. If you’re going to compete in the Fortune 500, you’d better know how to generate the best revenue.

5. The world’s best salesmen don’t have a 100% sales rate, or a 75% sales rate; nor do they have a 50% sales rate, or even a 25% sales rate. The world’s best salesmen are lucky to maintain a 10% sales rate. A 10% sales rate = one in every 10.

 If you’re not catching my drift yet, think of it this way: To win this game, you have to be the best company you can be, making the best product and selling the best services. Moreover, you have to keep trying to improve every aspect of your corporation, no matter what hurdles you face. (For example, the GAP went through a slow sales period for some years, but the company has started posting increases in their quarterly sales.)

*It's not just sex (EXCELLENT!!!) "By participating in the hook-up culture, we reinforce the idea that the emotional energy required for sex is no different from that required for self-pleasure or pornography, we reinforce the belief that genuine relationships come second to an orgasm, we reinforce the notion that sex is just an emotionless, mindless, physical act. But sex is so much more than that. Sex becomes a deep, romantic, beautiful thing when combined with love and trust."
*Finally someone says it: Hook up culture is good for women (feminist barf). Here's a quote that the author disagrees with but I agree with, "The central argument holds that women have effectively been duped by a sexual revolution that persuaded them to trade away the protections of (and from) young men. In return, they were left even more vulnerable and exploited than before. Sexual liberation, goes the argument, primarily liberated men-to act as cads, using women for their own pleasures and taking no responsibility for the emotional wreckage that their behavior created. The men hold all the cards, and the women put up with it because now it's too late to zip it back up, so they don't have a choice."
*The effect of hook up culture on men (basically saying that since men can get women so easily they don't feel the need to be successful or put in much effort to get women, including committing to them)
*Is hook up culture empowering? (VERY GOOD!!!)

Auditioning for the Role of Wife or Girlfriend

Take a good look at yourself and think about this quote.
Are you really that happy right now? Could you
become happier by making some simple changes?

This post was inspired by a recent article on Clutch called, "These Beauty Faux Pas Could Keep you from Getting Hired" (yes I am still reading the blog and I have become a lurker). This just reminds me of the idea that when you are interacting with men you meet, you are pretty much interviewing or auditioning for the role of wife or girlfriend. Being a wife or girlfriend is a job that has certain requirement and duties and not just anyone is qualified or good at this job. Men know what makes a woman "wife material" even if you disagree with them, think they are old fashioned, or think they are unfair. For example they probably want someone who is kind, understanding, not a nag, attractive, healthy, takes pride in their appearance, hygienic, a good cook, a good homemaker, faithful, nurturing to children, law abiding, not embarrassing to him or his family, similar values, etc.

Be such a fantastic and feminine woman that people
will automatically assume you are great and that
you have desirable qualities.

Every time you meet a man (or someone who can set you up with a single man) you are auditioning for the role of girlfriend or wife. They will not postpone evaluation until you are ready and they will not only focus on your good points; they are evaluating everything about you. Women like to advise other women to "just be yourself" because that helps their friends to not feel anxious or worry that they will fail the interview. But how well could you possibly do on an interview if you don't have any of the job qualifications? You may fumble around trying to make your qualities sound appealing or you may state that you are a fast learner and you will learn the job. Maybe if you act really nice, show them some leg (or promise to show more), or shame them then they will give you a chance right?

If you want to be happy either improve yourself
and your life of expect less for  yourself and your life.

But the fact remains that you knew the qualifications required for the job, you ignored the qualifications, you are pressuring them to hire someone they don't want, and there are plenty of other applicants who have the qualities they are looking for! If we relate this to dating, men find certain things attractive about women that make them look like "marriage material", some women do not have those qualities or refuse to make themselves attractive in those ways, they criticize and shame men about their preferences and demand acceptance of their undesirable qualities, and they expect to be considered just as attractive as women who have all the desired qualities! Do you see how ridiculous that is? You know that most men don't want serious relationships with promiscuous women yet you listen to feminists advocating that you embrace your "inner slut" (ARTICLE2). You know that most men prefer feminine, gentle, and kind women yet you dress and act like a man, compete with them in manly tasks, act like you hate them, and reject your femininity. You know that men want to feel needed and care for their families but you loudly proclaim "I don't need no man" and "my career comes before family". You say it is too much work to make yourself more attractive and men should accept you just the way you are but you are lazy, obnoxious, mean, argumentative, and you have let your looks go downhill. Yet you act surprised when they pass you by?

Become more feminine because you believe it is the
best option for you and an expression of your best self.

Pretending to be something you are not may not work because eventually your true colours will shine through and you may be unhappy. The key word here is pretending. That would mean you are just going through the motions to attract and keep a man but you plan on returning to your former behaviour at some point since you believe your former self was better. I'm not interested in pretending. I'm interested in learning and changing for the better because one believes her appearance and behaviour needs improvement, one knows she was not doing her best before, these improvements are meant to be permanent, and there is no desire or attachment for one's previous appearance or behaviour. With pretending the person feels like a fake, they are not who they are meant to be, they are ashamed of the person they have become, and there is no internal change in beliefs only caving to external pressure. In contrast, when one changes for the better they are proud of the new person they have become, regret that they had not always been so great, wonder why they did not have the same high standards in the past, and there is an internal change because one believes that normative feminine qualities are actually better. This person has seen her true potential, she is finally being her best self, and her former self was due to a lack of effort, opportunity, or self-knowledge. This blog is about changing because my knowledge and beliefs have changed not because I feel pressure to do something I don't even appreciate. I truly believe that being a feminine woman is better than the alternatives.

Be impressed with how much you have improved!

So if you want a particular job (i.e., man) but lack the qualifications what do you do? Well you can give up on the job just as many women have given up on getting a high quality man. Or you can go get some training so that you qualify of that job! You have to believe in your training though and think that it is making you a better person. When you get that job you make sure to use your new skills and show that the right woman was hired, and after a while the job will become easier and more automatic. When you get a man you need to keep up your appearance and behaviour and not let yourself go just because you have been chosen. After a while the new behaviours and keeping up your appearance will become easier and automatic too. You can be fired for poor performance on the job and you can be dumped for poor performance as a girlfriend or wife but some women just don't register these facts. And yes of course you can quit your job or dump your man if they do not meet your standards either, this isn't one sided. The men who approach you are also auditioning and you have certain qualifications you are looking for. Don't let men or anyone else tell you that you should accept an unqualified applicant because he will not be able to do the job of boyfriend or husband for you! Don't expect him to learn the job quickly or get more training along the way, just reject unqualified applicants because someone better will come along if you are an attractive employer offering a desirable benefits package ;)

Are Women in Competition?

Dating and self-promotion "Self promotion begins with the basic product for sale - you. If it is no good, no one will buy into it. You may be able to fool the odd one or two but that's about it. So the first step has to be to sort out your product and make sure it is as appealing as possible. Whilst I get lots of comments about how one has matured and is able to look below the surface, the surface is the first thing we encounter so it needs to be presentable." I'm definitely not the first to think about dating and marriage using business models! You should really read this article!

************************************************

I am agnostic. That means I am highly skeptical about the existence of God and I am not religious in any way. That means I do not believe that if I am a good person then someone out there will send me the good things that I want. I do not believe my praying or wishing for things will make them happen for me. I do not believe that the universe will give me what I desire. I do believe that if I want things then I have to decide to do something to make those things happen. Notice I said I have to DO SOMETHING.

The problem is that the things I want are not easy to get (at least not for me). It takes a great effort and a lot of time to have a great career. It takes a lot of effort to make and keep friends. It also takes a great effort to be in the right places to be asked out by men, to be well behaved enough to not get dumped because of one's behaviour (sometimes it just happens not due to anything the woman did), and to get along with a man in order to have a lasting relationship. In all of these cases I don't think I can just sit back and expect all of these things to happen without any effort from myself.

Furthermore, it's not as though there are enough great careers out there for everyone who wants them. That's why we compete to be the best, know the right people, and present ourselves best during interviews...we are competing with other people for the same jobs. There are only so many hours in a day for your friends to spend with you so in a way, you have to compete for their attention by making plans to see them, calling them, and staying on their radar. You should all be making an effort in this regards. But if your friend is always the one contacting you and you make no effort they may think you don't care and start spending time with other friends. Maintaining friendships takes effort or they may fade.

This brings me to the man issue. Every woman wants a good man who will love only her. They also want someone who has the qualities they want (e.g., good looking, kind, good provider, wants kids, believes in marriage, single etc.). Well I don't think there are enough perfect guys out there for every woman who wants one mainly because perfect guys don't exist and those who are close to perfect are not as common as those with major flaws. Plus, because of personality differences you might not get along with a seemingly perfect guy. On top of that in Western societies it is still the norm for men to pursue women so all a woman can do is  be present and attractive in settings where potential dates can ask her out. So a woman can make an effort to be attractive and be seen by men. In these settings men have their pick and they want the best woman they can get so THEY WILL COMPARE YOU TO OTHER WOMEN! Many even rank women before deciding to approach or date you! So no, I do not want to be in competition with other women but I am because men are comparing us. If I was the only woman on a deserted island with 5 guys then they would be competing for me and I could sit back and make no effort (or at least not repulse them all by my appearance and behaviour). But that's not my reality.

I am a realist and I accept the reality that men are the pursuers and they will compare me to other women before asking me out or becoming monogamous. This means I am in competition with the other women he could choose. So if I want that man I have to look and behave in a way that makes me more appealing than the other women. I want a man and I will do what I need to do (within reason while being ladylike) to attract and keep the one I want. In the past (and even in many places today) this endeavor used to be the most important thing in women's lives! From a young age they learned skills and were groomed to be good wives but now we look down on that! Don't kid yourself by thinking this is unfair because men are also trained from a young age to be good husbands and highly masculine. Seriously I do not understand women nowadays who don't get this! Do you live under a rock? How can you not think you are in competition with other women? Maybe it's vanity or something and you think Mr. Right will just magically appear and choose you despite letting yourself go and your nasty, argumentative attitude but whatever. I have no time for those daydreams.

I'm not going to argue with men about what they should look for in a woman, how wrong it is to rank us, or why they are wrong for being attracted to certain women. This is RIDICULOUS and USELESS behaviour that many women are serious about, especially on women's issue/feminist blogs. It really makes women look insane trying to tell men what they should want. If men are attracted to beautiful and sexually attractive women then your trying to convince them to ignore those things is not only arrogant, but useless because we have little mental control over who we find physically attractive. Plus, I'm sure if a woman is beautiful but horrible many men would give her up once they learned the truth. They have to learn if they can get along with you, they won't be sure of this just looking at you. This "he should like me only for my personality" stuff has to end. He can like you for whatever reason he wants and you can't control that! You can only dump him if you don't like his reasons. The same goes for women because we can like men for whatever reason we want. Let people like what they like instead of using rationalization, shame, guilt, or something else to convince them their preferences are wrong. That's just useless and annoying. You just have to be attractive, you can't convince someone of that, they have to see that for themselves..talk is cheap.

As usual, you can do what you want, don't compete if you don't want to :)

Related Articles:
Yes women do compete for men
The game theory of female competition
Romance is dead: reflections on today's dating scene (yes, there is research studying the ways women compete for men)."Related to this issue of competition is that many women try to determine what potential rivals are doing so that they can be unique, but not too unique as to become freakish. The majority of women I've talked to undertake considerable effort to think about their rivals, and what they will be facing in terms of competition."
Dating dish: self-promotion
Women use Facebook to compete for men