I am Jean
-
Duncan Butlin
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:33 am
- Location: Chichester, West Sussex, UK
- Contact:
Good morning Jean,
If you don’t mind, first of all I’d like to get a few things straight between us, just to clear the air. Let’s start with me: I am a 62-year-old British man, divorced, retired, studying programming at a local college, and whose main preoccupation is the sex war. I am trying to re-establish patriarchy, though without a wife it is a bit of a thankless task.
Right, please may I now ask you some questions? Is that you there in the photograph? A man in a t-shirt with stubble? And is that your daughter with you, lending you support?
I hope you do not find this too blunt an introduction, but I am only now learning how to do this sort of thing on-line. It took me 62 years to half-learn it in the flesh, so God only knows how long it will take me to learn, without any of the normal clues or signals. Still, I am determined to try.
Only if you respond shall I know if it has been nice talking to you or not! It has to be a mutual agreement. But I’d anyway like to thank you for your attention -- it is most kind of you to spare the time.
If you don’t mind, first of all I’d like to get a few things straight between us, just to clear the air. Let’s start with me: I am a 62-year-old British man, divorced, retired, studying programming at a local college, and whose main preoccupation is the sex war. I am trying to re-establish patriarchy, though without a wife it is a bit of a thankless task.
Right, please may I now ask you some questions? Is that you there in the photograph? A man in a t-shirt with stubble? And is that your daughter with you, lending you support?
I hope you do not find this too blunt an introduction, but I am only now learning how to do this sort of thing on-line. It took me 62 years to half-learn it in the flesh, so God only knows how long it will take me to learn, without any of the normal clues or signals. Still, I am determined to try.
Only if you respond shall I know if it has been nice talking to you or not! It has to be a mutual agreement. But I’d anyway like to thank you for your attention -- it is most kind of you to spare the time.
Sorry I forgot that I had introduced myself, I changed the avatar as it seemed a bit inflamatory, but,Duncan Butlin wrote:Right, please may I now ask you some questions? Is that you there in the photograph? A man in a t-shirt with stubble? And is that your daughter with you, lending you support?
The man is David Koresh, the girl is one of the Branch Davidian children; the avatar is a screen cap from Waco - A New Revelation (1999) (Part 1 of 2),
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 3532885562
If you're not interested in watching a Waco documentary, I'll sum up the scene fom the screen cap;
It is in the Branch Davidian compound, a few days before the tragic fire, Koresh and the girl are giving an interview in which they are making various requests for food and water and so on, the conversation goes roughly like this:
Koresh: Food... water... can you think of anything else we need?
Girl: Um... Ice cream?
Koresh: Ice cream? You want ice cream?
Girl: Yeah.
Koresh: I don't know if they give ice cream to terrorists. Are you a terrorist?
Girl: A terrorist? No.
Koresh: Well then, can we get some ice cream in here?
R.I.P.
-
Duncan Butlin
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:33 am
- Location: Chichester, West Sussex, UK
- Contact:
Good evening, Mr. Jean,
Thanks for the explanation, and you were very perceptive: I do not like watching videos of such things! Things do go terribly wrong on occasion, don’t they?
We have met elsewhere on the site, so I won’t go on about things here. Just to say that today I have presented my ideas to a lecturer in philosophy at the University of London, and to our local Church of England minister and his wife too. The lecturer has already responded very favourably, which has made my day. I am going to attend one of his talks up in London next Saturday, and hope we will get a chance to talk. The Reverend and his wife only received my letter a few hours ago, so I guess I’ll have to wait awhile to hear from them.
I meant what I said about phoning me, though. I really would be delighted to receive your call (no-one from the site has done so, yet -- much to my disappointment). I worry that, without any real human contact, people can go off half-cocked.
Thanks for the explanation, and you were very perceptive: I do not like watching videos of such things! Things do go terribly wrong on occasion, don’t they?
We have met elsewhere on the site, so I won’t go on about things here. Just to say that today I have presented my ideas to a lecturer in philosophy at the University of London, and to our local Church of England minister and his wife too. The lecturer has already responded very favourably, which has made my day. I am going to attend one of his talks up in London next Saturday, and hope we will get a chance to talk. The Reverend and his wife only received my letter a few hours ago, so I guess I’ll have to wait awhile to hear from them.
I meant what I said about phoning me, though. I really would be delighted to receive your call (no-one from the site has done so, yet -- much to my disappointment). I worry that, without any real human contact, people can go off half-cocked.
-
Duncan Butlin
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:33 am
- Location: Chichester, West Sussex, UK
- Contact:
Good morning Mr. Jean,
Oh dear, I wonder how many other people don’t realise all my details are in my Wiki link? I thought it would be too pedantic to put them directly in my signature, but may be I should reconsider? Anyway, sorry for the misunderstanding, and I repeat them here for convenience:
51 Bradshaw Road,
Chichester, West Sussex,
PO19 6TN, United Kingdom
home: + [44] - (124) - 352 7975
mobile: + [44] - (772) - 407 5843
From the timing of your posts I am assuming you are in foreign parts, but if you are inside the UK, simply replace the ’44’ with a zero. I go to college (where I can only call back on the mobile during break times) Monday morning and afternoon, and Tuesday and Thursday mornings -- much of the rest of the time I am at home. Please feel free to call me at any time -- even in the middle of the night -- and I will be delighted to talk to you.
But please, anybody, please note: just click on the Wiki link in my signature below, and it will take you to all my personal information. I am happy to talk to anyone who wants an ‘ear-to-ear’ discussion. In many ways I prefer it!
Oh dear, I wonder how many other people don’t realise all my details are in my Wiki link? I thought it would be too pedantic to put them directly in my signature, but may be I should reconsider? Anyway, sorry for the misunderstanding, and I repeat them here for convenience:
51 Bradshaw Road,
Chichester, West Sussex,
PO19 6TN, United Kingdom
home: + [44] - (124) - 352 7975
mobile: + [44] - (772) - 407 5843
From the timing of your posts I am assuming you are in foreign parts, but if you are inside the UK, simply replace the ’44’ with a zero. I go to college (where I can only call back on the mobile during break times) Monday morning and afternoon, and Tuesday and Thursday mornings -- much of the rest of the time I am at home. Please feel free to call me at any time -- even in the middle of the night -- and I will be delighted to talk to you.
But please, anybody, please note: just click on the Wiki link in my signature below, and it will take you to all my personal information. I am happy to talk to anyone who wants an ‘ear-to-ear’ discussion. In many ways I prefer it!
-
Lusia Mousky
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:34 pm
I first thought that Chichester was a fictitious name, like Cheshire in a book about Alice.
But I found it on the map, it is on the coast, between Brighton and Southhampton.
Are you not afraid that some bad people might terrorize you in the middle of the night, Mr. Butlin ?
I am surprised that someone can disclose his name and phone number in public like this.
Could you put in a nutshell what is good about patriarchy ?
But I found it on the map, it is on the coast, between Brighton and Southhampton.
Are you not afraid that some bad people might terrorize you in the middle of the night, Mr. Butlin ?
I am surprised that someone can disclose his name and phone number in public like this.
Could you put in a nutshell what is good about patriarchy ?
-
artisticsolution
- Posts: 1942
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am
Hi Lusia,Lusia Mousky wrote:
Could you put in a nutshell what is good about patriarchy ?
I am sorry to interrupt but I'd like to field that question.
When I think about patriarchy in the respect that all men should be the head of their families, I think this must not ever become the norm again.
However, when I think about it in an idealistic way, which is to say that all women can come to love and respect their spouse (which should be the case if we are talking about love, trust and marriage) then I would say that a woman would find herself very lucky indeed to find a man she could experience this lifestyle with. Unfortunately this is not the world we live in as most people in general are in need of a prozac the size of a football! (and not just men! Myself included!)
The reason I say women would find themselves lucky to find someone they could love and trust enough to allow them to be the patriarch is because I have discovered in my lifetime most women are attracted to men who are better than them in some way...whether it be intelligence, physical strength, wealth, etc. It is important for the woman to believe her man is someone she can admire and look up to.
However, this is not so much important to men (except for physical beauty) I have come to notice. Men tend to not mind if their women is less intelligent, strong, wealthy, etc. In fact, for a woman to have these qualities is a detriment in most cases.
Oh sure...men seek intelligent women...just not more intelligent than they are.
Conflict arises when men and women are foolish in rushing into love too quickly, before they have a chance to discovered what they will be able to live with as far as a relationship goes. When the man finally realizes his wife is not only attractive but also smarter than he is he gets jealous.
And when the women discovers this she has married a schmo, she becomes controlling and bossy (in his eyes) ....simply for the fact she can't trust his judgment and she loses respect for his decision making skills in regards to her safety, comfort and general well being.. It is for this reason the patriarch system will never come back into fashion. Women can't pretend anymore. They have come to a point of no return.
We now know what it is like to work, take care of a family, get an education, etc. We are smarter and it takes a lot more to earn our respect. Being equal to a man has made it difficult to find love for sure...that is, if we desire a man who stands tall in our eyes.
I am lucky enough to have found this so I can happily say I give the power to my man. The problem is...if he no longer existed...I don't think there is a man alive who I could give the same respect. (of course I don't know this because I haven't met every man alive...lol...but you get what I am saying I hope.)
Anyway, Duncan may disagree with what I a saying....and Duncan, I hope you are reading this because you gave me a lot to think about in your last response in another thread. I have to admit. I can't wait to hear your reply to the question lusia presented above!
-
Duncan Butlin
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:33 am
- Location: Chichester, West Sussex, UK
- Contact:
Good evening, Ms. Mousky,
No, there’s nothing fictitious about any of the details I have posted on the forum or on Wikipedia (glad you found Chichester!); and yes, it is surprising that no-one hassles me -- even if just for fun. But no-one has ever done so yet, and the same thing happened to me when my picture filled the front page of a community newspaper in Aberdeen (Scotland), in 1998 -- as an anti-feminist campaigner. I published my full name, address and phone number, and yet nobody misbehaved. In fact the president of the Lesbian and Gay Society at the university requested a formal interview, and she and I had a lovely meeting on the grass outside their university library. Their Sociology Society invited me to be their inaugural speaker! I had an absolutely wonderful time, surrounded by all those lovely young ladies.
You ask for the advantages of patriarchy, but unfortunately you catch me unprepared. I am trying to put something together for Wikipedia, but I have achieved nothing, as yet. So please excuse me for shooting from the hip. Patriarchy means: relative peace and tranquility between sexes, with the occasional skirmish. Power is balanced as follows: men are sporadically confrontational, whereas women are persistently manipulative. The man is the head of the family, and leader in public affairs, while the woman is always influencing him, and getting him to change his mind. Female misbehaviour is corrected in private, by the husband, while male misbehaviour is corrected in public, by society and the law. The family unit is strong and stable -- divorce being very, very rare -- and the division of labour is strictly along sexist lines. Instead of competing with the whole of society, each person only has to deal with 50% -- an unbelievable improvement over a society based on equality.
There are many, many other aspects, to do with hierarchy and authority, threat and respect, love and control, but I cannot put them in a nutshell, so I better keep my mouth shut. One key balance is between the male freedom to relate, versus the female freedom from relationship. This determines the level of fear and antisocial behaviour in a society. When men have too much power, a dictator or elite group rules, women have no say, crime is minimised, and progress stagnates. In balance (patriarchy), men rule, women complain, crime is acceptable, and progress is orderly. When women have too much power, the market rules, both men AND women complain, crime mushrooms, and progress runs out of control.
I know it is not a nutshell, but it’s the best I can manage at the moment. I hope I have not bored you to death?
No, there’s nothing fictitious about any of the details I have posted on the forum or on Wikipedia (glad you found Chichester!); and yes, it is surprising that no-one hassles me -- even if just for fun. But no-one has ever done so yet, and the same thing happened to me when my picture filled the front page of a community newspaper in Aberdeen (Scotland), in 1998 -- as an anti-feminist campaigner. I published my full name, address and phone number, and yet nobody misbehaved. In fact the president of the Lesbian and Gay Society at the university requested a formal interview, and she and I had a lovely meeting on the grass outside their university library. Their Sociology Society invited me to be their inaugural speaker! I had an absolutely wonderful time, surrounded by all those lovely young ladies.
You ask for the advantages of patriarchy, but unfortunately you catch me unprepared. I am trying to put something together for Wikipedia, but I have achieved nothing, as yet. So please excuse me for shooting from the hip. Patriarchy means: relative peace and tranquility between sexes, with the occasional skirmish. Power is balanced as follows: men are sporadically confrontational, whereas women are persistently manipulative. The man is the head of the family, and leader in public affairs, while the woman is always influencing him, and getting him to change his mind. Female misbehaviour is corrected in private, by the husband, while male misbehaviour is corrected in public, by society and the law. The family unit is strong and stable -- divorce being very, very rare -- and the division of labour is strictly along sexist lines. Instead of competing with the whole of society, each person only has to deal with 50% -- an unbelievable improvement over a society based on equality.
There are many, many other aspects, to do with hierarchy and authority, threat and respect, love and control, but I cannot put them in a nutshell, so I better keep my mouth shut. One key balance is between the male freedom to relate, versus the female freedom from relationship. This determines the level of fear and antisocial behaviour in a society. When men have too much power, a dictator or elite group rules, women have no say, crime is minimised, and progress stagnates. In balance (patriarchy), men rule, women complain, crime is acceptable, and progress is orderly. When women have too much power, the market rules, both men AND women complain, crime mushrooms, and progress runs out of control.
I know it is not a nutshell, but it’s the best I can manage at the moment. I hope I have not bored you to death?
-
Lusia Mousky
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:34 pm
Hi artisticsolution,
I see the point but I would like to object as follows:
no sensible woman, feminist or not, wants to destroy a man´s virility, his determination, energy, creativity etc.
Who needs a grumpy snail lying on the sofa all day ?
A smart woman always nurses a man´s fragile ego.
How ?
It´s easy. For example: you just look out of the window and say: Oh, your Eiffel Tower looks great, darling. Go on. I cannot wait to see it when it is finished.
The problem arises when a crazy male, instead of doing great things outside, gets into his mind to prove his maleness by subjugating the queen.
I see the point but I would like to object as follows:
no sensible woman, feminist or not, wants to destroy a man´s virility, his determination, energy, creativity etc.
Who needs a grumpy snail lying on the sofa all day ?
A smart woman always nurses a man´s fragile ego.
How ?
It´s easy. For example: you just look out of the window and say: Oh, your Eiffel Tower looks great, darling. Go on. I cannot wait to see it when it is finished.
The problem arises when a crazy male, instead of doing great things outside, gets into his mind to prove his maleness by subjugating the queen.
-
Lusia Mousky
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:34 pm
Good afternoon, Mr. Butlin,
no, you have not bored me to death. Quite the contrary, I feel like talking to someone from a Victorian novel.
How do you imagine a husband should correct a female misbehaviour ? With a stick, like in Arab countries ?
Coran says: beat your wife seven times a day, if you do not know what for, she knows.
But as I heard Arab women are becoming less and less willing to tolerate this.
no, you have not bored me to death. Quite the contrary, I feel like talking to someone from a Victorian novel.
How do you imagine a husband should correct a female misbehaviour ? With a stick, like in Arab countries ?
Coran says: beat your wife seven times a day, if you do not know what for, she knows.
But as I heard Arab women are becoming less and less willing to tolerate this.
-
artisticsolution
- Posts: 1942
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am
Hi Lusia,
Thank you for your response. I enjoyed what you wrote!
L:no sensible woman, feminist or not, wants to destroy a man´s virility, his determination, energy, creativity etc.
Who needs a grumpy snail lying on the sofa all day ?
AS: No woman, feminist or not, can destroy any part of a strong man. If he can be destroyed by a woman's influence then he was never a 'man' in the first place.
L:A smart woman always nurses a man´s fragile ego.
AS: If a man's ego is that fragile that he falls to pieces when a woman speaks her mind then he needs to seriously reexamine his idea of masculinity.
I used to have this boyfriend who used to joke, "You can't hurt me!"
Of course I took delight in playfully trying to hurt him in any way I could. I would give him purple nurples and dig deep into his muscles when I gave him massages and just be downright bratty when we argued and he always laughed off my attempts to undermine his masculinity. Nothing I could do would phase him...he just patted my head condescendingly, smile and say...idn't she cute! I have to admit, there was a certain sexiness in knowing he was stronger willed than I was. He was in complete control of himself and to me that is the epitome of a man. Any man who loses control of his ego due to the influence of a woman is wimpy in my eyes.
L:It´s easy. For example: you just look out of the window and say: Oh, your Eiffel Tower looks great, darling. Go on. I cannot wait to see it when it is finished.
AS: Of course. It is important to appreciate the talent of anyone you love. We should inspire each other with honest praise. But If a man is a man, I doubt there is anything we could say to stop him from doing what he truly wishes to do. Manipulation only gets us so far.
L:The problem arises when a crazy male, instead of doing great things outside, gets into his mind to prove his maleness by subjugating the queen.
AS: LOL I like the way you worded this! Too funny!
Thank you for your response. I enjoyed what you wrote!
L:no sensible woman, feminist or not, wants to destroy a man´s virility, his determination, energy, creativity etc.
Who needs a grumpy snail lying on the sofa all day ?
AS: No woman, feminist or not, can destroy any part of a strong man. If he can be destroyed by a woman's influence then he was never a 'man' in the first place.
L:A smart woman always nurses a man´s fragile ego.
AS: If a man's ego is that fragile that he falls to pieces when a woman speaks her mind then he needs to seriously reexamine his idea of masculinity.
I used to have this boyfriend who used to joke, "You can't hurt me!"
Of course I took delight in playfully trying to hurt him in any way I could. I would give him purple nurples and dig deep into his muscles when I gave him massages and just be downright bratty when we argued and he always laughed off my attempts to undermine his masculinity. Nothing I could do would phase him...he just patted my head condescendingly, smile and say...idn't she cute! I have to admit, there was a certain sexiness in knowing he was stronger willed than I was. He was in complete control of himself and to me that is the epitome of a man. Any man who loses control of his ego due to the influence of a woman is wimpy in my eyes.
L:It´s easy. For example: you just look out of the window and say: Oh, your Eiffel Tower looks great, darling. Go on. I cannot wait to see it when it is finished.
AS: Of course. It is important to appreciate the talent of anyone you love. We should inspire each other with honest praise. But If a man is a man, I doubt there is anything we could say to stop him from doing what he truly wishes to do. Manipulation only gets us so far.
L:The problem arises when a crazy male, instead of doing great things outside, gets into his mind to prove his maleness by subjugating the queen.
AS: LOL I like the way you worded this! Too funny!
-
Lusia Mousky
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:34 pm
When a man works hard all day and comes back home he needs to relax and not to go on fighting on a "home front" with a nagging wife.
As far as I know any man, however big and superhuman a hero, needs love and sweetness (douceur) and warmth. It is not a question of manipulating anyone. I refuse to manipulate and to play any games with anyone.
Maybe these supermen you were lucky to have met in your life were secretely on Prozac ?
Anyway.
It could be that our opposite views have a very simple reason: I had (and still have) a younger brother and you possibly had an older one.
I was very surprised indeed one time when one of my friends reproched me of treating all men (of our age) as half-wits. I thought I was being rather friendly with them.
But I did have an uncle in my childhood. I considered him more of being on my level than my brother. He was 16 years older than me.
I just do not feel the need of submitting to a man. And I refuse to pretend otherwise for the sake of some romantic prospects.
Dorothea Brooke in "Middlemarch" married a much older man because she needed badly to feel inferior. I am looking forward to see what she ends up with.
I am still a very nice person, it seems to me, I have the impression that lots of "half-wits" would be happy to start a close relationship with me.
They seem to want to be in good hands, like puppies.
It could be that the world has become so scary that the prospect of a home with an older sister or even a grand ma, reliable and sensible, is what they need.
As far as I know any man, however big and superhuman a hero, needs love and sweetness (douceur) and warmth. It is not a question of manipulating anyone. I refuse to manipulate and to play any games with anyone.
Maybe these supermen you were lucky to have met in your life were secretely on Prozac ?
Anyway.
It could be that our opposite views have a very simple reason: I had (and still have) a younger brother and you possibly had an older one.
I was very surprised indeed one time when one of my friends reproched me of treating all men (of our age) as half-wits. I thought I was being rather friendly with them.
But I did have an uncle in my childhood. I considered him more of being on my level than my brother. He was 16 years older than me.
I just do not feel the need of submitting to a man. And I refuse to pretend otherwise for the sake of some romantic prospects.
Dorothea Brooke in "Middlemarch" married a much older man because she needed badly to feel inferior. I am looking forward to see what she ends up with.
I am still a very nice person, it seems to me, I have the impression that lots of "half-wits" would be happy to start a close relationship with me.
They seem to want to be in good hands, like puppies.
It could be that the world has become so scary that the prospect of a home with an older sister or even a grand ma, reliable and sensible, is what they need.
-
artisticsolution
- Posts: 1942
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am
Hi Lusia,
L:When a man works hard all day and comes back home he needs to relax and not to go on fighting on a "home front" with a nagging wife.
AS: Same with a woman. Everyone should be able to come home to a protective, comforting and loving home. What's the sense of getting married if you can't? I would rather live alone than to live with fear and discontent in the pit of my stomach.
L:As far as I know any man, however big and superhuman a hero, needs love and sweetness (douceur) and warmth. It is not a question of manipulating anyone. I refuse to manipulate and to play any games with anyone.
AS: Everyone manipulates. A person is only kidding themselves when they say they don't. Manipulation is not a bad thing necessarily. It is just a form of communication. Inspiration is manipulation. Would you call a muse manipulative? No...but she is the very essence of the word if we wish to speak the truth.
L:Maybe these supermen you were lucky to have met in your life were secretely on Prozac ?
AS: LOL. Perhaps, but why take such a pessimistic outlook on men? Maybe it is simply because I choose to have relationships with people who are sane, responsible adults? If more women found sanity in a man a worthy prospect for a partner to have, I think more men would strive to be sane. No sanity no poon tan has always been my motto!
L:It could be that our opposite views have a very simple reason:
AS: I don't think we have opposite views...I just think we are saying the same thing differently.
L: I had (and still have) a younger brother and you possibly had an older one.
AS: I had no brothers and no father. I did have uncles who tortured me when the women were not around, and a grandfather I adored but was too busy to really spend time with (which I regret.) I just always expected men to show me the same respect I showed them. If they didn't respect me then I didn't respect them. If they tried to control me...then I sought to control them. Actually, I just have no desire for the bullshit and I tend to dispose of men very easily if they are not to my liking. So then...all that are left are the superheros! Easy!
L:I just do not feel the need of submitting to a man. And I refuse to pretend otherwise for the sake of some romantic prospects.
AS: Good, I feel the same way. But when you finally meet the man of your dreams and really study your behavior...on a deep and intimate level, you may realize that you have submitted to him and he to you.
L:Dorothea Brooke in "Middlemarch" married a much older man because she needed badly to feel inferior. I am looking forward to see what she ends up with.
AS: Hopefully he is exactly what she needs. If she has fooled herself into thinking this is what she desires it will not last. But I do love love... I hope everyone can find love with the right person for them.
L:I am still a very nice person, it seems to me, I have the impression that lots of "half-wits" would be happy to start a close relationship with me.
AS: You seem like a very nice person and you have a great personality!
I am sure you don't lack for suitors.
L:When a man works hard all day and comes back home he needs to relax and not to go on fighting on a "home front" with a nagging wife.
AS: Same with a woman. Everyone should be able to come home to a protective, comforting and loving home. What's the sense of getting married if you can't? I would rather live alone than to live with fear and discontent in the pit of my stomach.
L:As far as I know any man, however big and superhuman a hero, needs love and sweetness (douceur) and warmth. It is not a question of manipulating anyone. I refuse to manipulate and to play any games with anyone.
AS: Everyone manipulates. A person is only kidding themselves when they say they don't. Manipulation is not a bad thing necessarily. It is just a form of communication. Inspiration is manipulation. Would you call a muse manipulative? No...but she is the very essence of the word if we wish to speak the truth.
L:Maybe these supermen you were lucky to have met in your life were secretely on Prozac ?
AS: LOL. Perhaps, but why take such a pessimistic outlook on men? Maybe it is simply because I choose to have relationships with people who are sane, responsible adults? If more women found sanity in a man a worthy prospect for a partner to have, I think more men would strive to be sane. No sanity no poon tan has always been my motto!
L:It could be that our opposite views have a very simple reason:
AS: I don't think we have opposite views...I just think we are saying the same thing differently.
L: I had (and still have) a younger brother and you possibly had an older one.
AS: I had no brothers and no father. I did have uncles who tortured me when the women were not around, and a grandfather I adored but was too busy to really spend time with (which I regret.) I just always expected men to show me the same respect I showed them. If they didn't respect me then I didn't respect them. If they tried to control me...then I sought to control them. Actually, I just have no desire for the bullshit and I tend to dispose of men very easily if they are not to my liking. So then...all that are left are the superheros! Easy!
L:I just do not feel the need of submitting to a man. And I refuse to pretend otherwise for the sake of some romantic prospects.
AS: Good, I feel the same way. But when you finally meet the man of your dreams and really study your behavior...on a deep and intimate level, you may realize that you have submitted to him and he to you.
L:Dorothea Brooke in "Middlemarch" married a much older man because she needed badly to feel inferior. I am looking forward to see what she ends up with.
AS: Hopefully he is exactly what she needs. If she has fooled herself into thinking this is what she desires it will not last. But I do love love... I hope everyone can find love with the right person for them.
L:I am still a very nice person, it seems to me, I have the impression that lots of "half-wits" would be happy to start a close relationship with me.
AS: You seem like a very nice person and you have a great personality!
I am sure you don't lack for suitors.