A Woman’s Version of Self-Reliance
A woman with self-reliance is like a bowling ball rolling down the street. You don’t need to pay attention to it unless it’s your bowling ball or your car in the way. If either of those are true, get your running shoes on or your credit card out. You’re about to pay for a fuck up.
No matter how many signs there are in front of an out of control bowling ball — telling it to turn around, shut the fuck up, or not return the calls of a guy who will only let it see his penis in the dark — the bowling ball won’t notice. Bowling balls are as dense as trash-compacted shit.
So are women.
Women and bowling balls will destroy anything in their path to satisfy their compulsive greed. Women crave attention and bowling balls crave speed; both will destroy lives, children, and their marriage to get more. Women are unlike bowling balls because no matter how drunk you get a bowling ball, you can’t fuck it. Like mine, your dick is way too big.
A woman’s version of self-reliance is fucking up so much on her own, she doesn’t have to ask for help. Someone has to physically force “help” up her metaphysical ass.
Women don’t have the man-brains suited for problem solving like men do. That’s why women have only invented like two things and neither was something that had a compass on it for convenience. What the fuck would a woman ever need with a compass? They don’t even know how to use them.
“Does the direction pointing at me tell me which way I’m going?”
That depends. Does it point to Retard Town?
A woman with “self-reliance” is one who is in denial and locked into a life-long scavenger hunt with no clue what her first mystery item even looks like.
1. Competence.
All a woman has to do to solve a problem is open her mouth. That’s where the old saying comes from, “A man in time saves nine.” Like when a woman doesn’t ask her husband if it’s safe to back out of a parking space at 20 miles an hour with platform sandals haphazardly on her feet and whilst on a cell phone — or when she doesn’t ask a man what it means to “make a right when the fucking internet directions say to make a right?”
A man in time saves nine.
Women who are “self-reliant” are really just silent time-bombs of cluster fuck, waltzing around making problems big enough for ten men when one man could have fixed it easily by himself an hour ago. When it comes to a full-fledged fuck up like a rear tire that is now a backseat, or dinner reservations that are now off by an hour, ten men have to fix it.
One man could have fixed either in the first place by not letting a woman drive. That’s a loss of Man Points.
Women are as obsessed with self-reliance as Dumbo was with his magic feather. The only difference between women and Dumbo is that in order to make Dumbo fly, we have to suspend our disbelief. In order to make women independent, we have to put Starbucks on every corner so they can’t possibly get lost, make everything free including loans and credit cards, and reverse numbers so that “children raised by single mothers are eight times more likely to go to prison” actually means “less likely”.
Just look at all those school shootings. According to prison statistics, those would have been less likely to happen if those children had been raised by single men. Women can’t even be reliant properly.
Related Articles:
Pages: « 10 9 [8] 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 » Show All
“Your attitude is the same as most women, it’s all about what he can do for you, and what you are saying when you claim you could marry him because you could not be submissive has nothing to do with you submitting to authority but everything to do with you not being able to control him. ”
This was the only thing that you were not right about- I am not controlling in relationships- I do have a lot of other flaws, like being a bad comunicator- but I have no desire to control men when I am in a relationships with them.
Also- I don’t believe in divorce, and wouldn’t do it.
If I recognize that I have these problems of not wanting my life to be like this, isn’t it better than doing what most women do? They get married anyway, and make their husband’s life a big fucking mess. I think recognizing your traits and acting responsibly is a good plan.
Yeah, Zardoz is right. Since Im pretty young, I know this limits alot of my perception.
So I admit I wouldnt know alot about this, but, i always figured when u get married u stick with it..ya know? Unless one person decides to be over bearing, and it jepordises (cant spell) you in some way.
But yeh…again…Zardoz is right…i have a fairy tale image of marriage…in particular weddings.
I know this Geeza- I agree with you.
@Clair- I think there is a lot more to making a marriage or relationship work that love- it Should certainly be high up there.
What I meant- but didn’t explain well, I guess- is that most people’s expectations for realtionships have changed so much in the past 40 years or so, and I doubt that many stop to really examine what we have now. I agree with many of the men here about the nature of the problem (symptoms) but I’m not sure I agree with the diagnosis or the remedy.
I wouldn’t be happy in a marriage that is structured like a heirarchy of any sort.
In reality, if a marriage is going to work, it’d require the two people involved submitting to the union between them- not one person to the other, exclusively. So, the best interests of the union should become the best interests of the two individual people- any other way would probably lead the marriage to disaster, only a matter of time as to when- I think this is what most of the men here have said, and that is what I think as well.
I think the problem with some of the females posting on this topic is that they’re still a bit immature and lack experiences of the world. Its not a bad thing exactly, childhood ought to be enjoyed and a learning experience. People aren’t born with wisdom, thus they still have fantasy ideals about fairy princess romantic (read disney) love weddings where everyone lives happily after. This is the common factor in why so many young couples these days split up in fact. They have no concept of the pressures involved in maintaining a household, meeting bill repayments, house repayments, car expenses, providing food, clothing and everything else required to maintain a “happy household”. Those are more often than anything else the primary reasons for a marriage or relationship tearing apart.
“I married him for love, coz he made me laugh and feel good, and treats me like an equal (read superior/panders to her wants and wishes at every turn),” turns into constant arguments as the financial pressure builds up, then becomes “he’s a useless son of a bitch who can’t provide for his family” in divorce court.
Learning from experience is wisdom, learning from the experience of others is genius.
marrage is supposed to be about teamwork, about two people sharing their resources to make a whole greater than the sum of it’s parts.
In order for it to work, the two people involved have to work with eachother, not in purely one completely dominant and one completely submissive roles, but in 2 people combining their strengths in the intrest of stability and security.
Your attitude is the same as most women, it’s all about what he can do for you, and what you are saying when you claim you could marry him because you could not be submissive has nothing to do with you submitting to authority but everything to do with you not being able to control him.
You are not approaching marrage as a give and take partnership where the give and take is done at the best intrests of both partners, but selfishly where you are worried about how the give and take will affect you, you want all the take you can have and want to avoid as much give as possible.
The bulk of women feel this way which is why 79% or almost 4 out ot 5 divorces are initiated by women, as soon as they have to give they want out.
that made me almost split a gut, some seriously funny shit.
women are attracted to capable men, those that can contribute to them something they can’t obtain for themselves, that it evolution and how survival of the species is possible.
no one finds lack of capability attractive, not men and certainly not women
I’ll bite… now that my father has semi retired my mother makes the bulk of the money in their household now…
Though it seems they keep seperate accounts now.
The odd thing is that my mother keeps trying to get dominance over him by claiming she’s worked just as hard as he did before he semi retired(runs a handy man business)
she doesn’t seem to understand that sitting behind a desk working with computers for 8 hours a day doesn’t compare to being a mile underground, on your back, under a giant heavy piece of diesel equipment in the muck for 12-16 hours not including shutdowns where they could be working double shifts 7 days a week. Where rock can fall for no appearant reason and crush you, infact he was one of the mine rescue teams to look for survivers in the westray coal mine disaster.
some how she thinks the 8 years she spent cleaning the house, looking after the kids, and having tea with her friends, then the following years in a climate controlled office sitting in a padded chair behind a desk compare to what my father had to endure.
the best is when she used to get pissed that he didn’t give her any credit for maintaing the house when she was working… that was because my sister and I did all the cleaning and cooking, but somehow she figured she deserved credit.
meanwhile he was doing the landscaping, repairs to the house, repairs to the vehicles and getting no credit.
I at an early age saw that women can be bat shit insane and live in their own entitlement world full of denial.
I dont get it..if he loved u he’d know that u wouldnt do that, and hes fine with it…..so why wouldnt u marry him anymore?
And all of that proves my point:
Women NOW want pure control of a relationship, NOT equality.
If it were truly equal, then that would mean the man had a say in the relationship, not only the women. And that he gets to argue what HE likes, not only what SHE likes. And that THEY work TOGETHER to get shit done.
You prove the point: YOU don’t want, YOU don’t like.
I don’t suppose you ever asked what HE wanted did you?
As always, women don’t have MORE equality than any man does, though that is what a lot want, read their posts here…..if you will notice, more and more, it is what THEY want, not what is best or right.
@Clair
The surprising thing is, I don’t suppose that marriages ARE teamwork according to women are they? I do like how it all boils down to “mean bastards” and “control”, and somehow, to a lot of YOUNG women, the whole point of marriage is missed, basically, men not being your paycheck simply because of “love”, and you don’t win simply because “you don’t like” and “I want”…………the whole process of marriage is what women anymore don’t understand, it is NOT JUST ABOUT YOURSELF.
“Love” anyone you want, simply don’t go broke in the process……..
and don’t get mad at a man that will walk away because the price outweighs the product.
@Feminazi Trolls coming thru here:
Do me a small favor, stop saying “Me, Me” and start saying “We, Us”.
You might be surprised what a man will do if you treat him like a man, and not like your employee. Give a man the respect he gives you because you demand it when he does not, and you will be amazed at the results.
The whole submission authority/leadership thing is the feminazi vision of a male led marriage.
Being a man doesnt mean banging your fists, stomping around the house and ordering the family around like a dictator. Thats what overbearing mothers do.
A guy is responsible for protecting and providing for his family without fuss or fanfare. The pressure comes with the territory.
Interesting and insightful point.
And that is what women no longer understand about love.
This is why I have decided to do my would-be-future-husband a favor and not marry him. Personal conflict: I could never submit to someone in a home/ my personal life, every day until I die-because of their gender or any other reason. Just couldn’t do it.
But I see the points that a lot of you guys here make about gender roles in marriage- don’t agree with ALL of them of course, but some. But, I could never live like that. I’d go nuts living under the authority/leadership, what ever you want to call it - of another person. I’m not a leader either. So I’m going to avoid it completely.
Exactly right! You can’t help who you fall in love with, and if the women is fine with being in charge, and the man is fine with it also, I don’t really see a problem.
That expectation and pressure is there whether its placed on us or not.
Well, a woman might love a man who’s less capable than her. Nothing wrong with that. In some families, the family might be better off with the wife making decisions in certain areas. I don’t see a need for one person to have authority or be in charge.
Well, I guess there is. But I still think its wrong to place all that expectancy on the man..thats alota pressure, and I couldn’t submit to my husband (if I did marry) based on the grounds that hes a man. But thats me, and luckly im allowed to think like that and not be stoned to death..:P But other girls who aren’t like me also have that freedom (although they are stoned in a different way, like there called names such as weak ect…i dont think thats true. Just another life path), like i said, i really believe its up to the individual.
hehe
there’s a difference between delegated authority and leadership though. Leadership involves veto power, delegated authority involves fulfilment of a duty or task. If the man wasn’t capable of the leadership aspect then he has no right being there in the first place.
If the hypothetical person didn’t want to follow a chicken, they shouldn’t have married one. They ought to rather have eaten it char grilled with green beans and scalloped potato.
My only warning is to be careful of chasing wants rather than needs, that’s a highspeed journey into a solid brick wall named destruction.
“In a marriage partnership, there’s only two people, so delegation would consist of whomever is best suited to a specific aspect being given authority over it.”
There! Thats what I think. :)
If the man is best suited in ALL areas, then fine, he should be in charge of all areas. You should be in charge over what ur best at.
“What areas wouldn’t you be able to allow your man leadership in Clair?”
Honestly? I dont know, the situation would have to arise i guess. Obviously anywhere where i think i could do a better job.
Maybe thats not what the hypothetical person in that scenario wanted.
What areas wouldn’t you be able to allow your man leadership in Clair?
A traditional marriage is not a tyranny, nor is it a venue where you would have no valid or considered input. When it comes to being head of a family household, its about having a great deal of responsibility and power of veto in order to protect said family from poor judgement. Truly, if your man wasn’t capable of listening to your input and assessing whether it was for good or ill, he’d not be worthy of being your husband. How can fulfill his role as provider and protector while you fulfill your own roles in the marriage partnership if he didn’t have final word on important issues. I’m not talking about being ordered like a servant, nor stood over by an imposing and towering figure. Nor am I speaking of trivial issues. Trivial issues take care of themselves in the moment they arise. A good leader delegates authority over certain aspects of the common good to be governed by others also. In a marriage partnership, there’s only two people, so delegation would consist of whomever is best suited to a specific aspect being given authority over it.