Bankers Rule The World

[Kentucky Gent]

My husband moved out in our thirties, after we had two children. While he couldn't support our family on his earnings, he wouldn't allow me to go to work in a manner consistent with paying our bills, though, he claimed he wanted to. The conversation has to exist from the beginning. I hate how broken our society is, and I'm glad to have landed on my feet.

I am truly sorry for that. I went through 2 divorces as a child, and as bad as my parents were as people and as parents, they both remarried far more evil people than themselves.

That said, we only have your side. Not that men can't bear the majority of the blame in any broken family situation. But the sisterhood tends to not even have the capacity for objective assessment, in my experience

 

[Kentucky Gent]

Where are the single women in there 20’s and 30’s at church? I’ve never seen them at catholic masses.

Try Boise, Idaho. They are there. But I'm middle-aged now, so they don't give me a second look.

 

[PineTreeFarmer]

I am truly sorry for that. I went through 2 divorces as a child, and as bad as my parents were as people and as parents, they both remarried far more evil people than themselves.

That said, we only have your side. Not that men can't bear the majority of the blame in any broken family situation. But the sisterhood tends to not even have the capacity for objective assessment, in my experience

I was the first one of my friends to have children, and every single friend I had as a child is a stay at home mom, now. They just needed someone to go first and lead by example, even if it's a tough one, I'm afraid.

 

[Blade Runner]

Try Boise, Idaho. They are there. But I'm middle-aged now, so they don't give me a second look.

Most of the catholic big city matching groups I have heard of rarely were fruitful for the people. I'm not sure if there were too many guys rushing in on the scene or if the catholic church seemed to just be a secular club at this point - that's the kind of vibe I got from the "churchgoers."

 

[sophistic-ated]

Because others introduce them to you?


They married in their early to mid 20s, precisely the point we are making here.

I'm saying to befriend boomers. Most great girls that I meet have all kinds of BS requirements that are shown to be nonsense once you are in their personal lives, and the fastest way for a millenial or zoomer to join such a girl's social circle is via her parents. It works for me, it works for my friends too.

 

[sophistic-ated]

Outside of Church? You are either not in America, or have abysmally low standards. I didn't meet marriage material women on the regular in America until entering into Orthodoxy and joining a ROCOR parish.

Wrong on all counts. I live along Roosh's last tour route.

What are abysmally low standards? I like pretty skinny women within my ethnic group.

 

[sophistic-ated]

You sound like a lucky guy then.

You can be lucky too. I am below average in several measures you are probably better than me. I'm telling you guys expanding your social circle works. You might not marry some random older person or woman you are not attracted to, but go ahead and make friends with them anyways, because you might put a ring on their friend, daughter, or sister.

 

[Rob Banks]

I agree, closer to a witch than what the Bible would have referred to as a midwife. However, here lies the problem:

-we, unfortunately, do not live in predominantly Christian societies. When hiring this woman I was aware she was not a Christian. My mistake was thinking "secular" means "secular" instead of "pagan undertones". Lesson learned. Now I'm apprehensive of seeking help from any alternative medicine providers, since now I wonder if "holistic" (as this midwitch described herself) really means "pagan".

- in all the research I had done prior to hiring, nowhere did the internet even say that it was even a thing. I must have read dozens of articles and they talked about the safety risks, but nowhere was this sex aspect mentioned as an almost requirement. It's hard to be on the lookout for something when we don't know there is something to beware of, and all I ever heard from Christians was positive things.

As for a tie-in to the original banker topic, I do believe there is some serious money going towards this. As I mentioned a few posts ago, in recent times states have been making it easier for unqualified individuals to offer midwife services. If the bankers wanted to shut down any alternatives to the medical industrial complex they would Shut It Down with the full power of the State. The fact that they have not, and if anything have made it easier for it to exist - while these midwives claim persecution - can only mean that they want it to exist as the flipside of the coin.

I am sorry you had a bad experience with a so-called "midwife."

However, this is not a good reason, IMO, to support increased System/State regulation.

If anything, it is likely the reason you got such a bad midwife was precisely because there are so many regulation, and so normal, Christian women with responsibilities and families to raise are not going to have time or willingness to jump through the System's hoops.

This "midwife" you hired, was she herself married? Did she have children?

Also, on another note, I notice oftentimes when a person suffers a tragedy, traumatic experience, or injustice, and there is nothing that can be done to "turn back the clock," he will often get involved in political campaigns thar promise to "fix" the supposed issue that made him suffer.

For example, people who have had a child be the victim of murder may get involved in anti-gun politics.

People who have had a daughter or sister suffer in an abusive marriage may get involved in political/social campaigns in favor of easy no-fault divorce and harsher sentences for male abusers.

Those who have lost a family member to drug addiction may campaign for tougher drug laws, as well as state programs that force (secular) "treatment" on unwilling addicts.

Those who have been alienated from a family member due to the latter's depression, incompetence, or insanity may campaign in favor of state funding for "mental health services," as well as coercive laws that mandate sufferers to receive "treatment."

Etc.

"That person/business wronged me. And since the State will not allow me to confront them directly and put a stop to it, then maybe we can at least petition the State regulate them, thereby indirectly putting a stop to it."

But what they don't see is that while these campaigns they engage in might make them feel like they are "doing something" -- and their hearts may really be in the right place -- once the new "regulations" get put into place, the nee system ends up being just as bad or worse than the old one.

They are petitioning the System to fix a probelm that was more than likely caused or greatly worsened by the System to begin with.

In fact, the System uses grieving families as pawns in their campaign for "social reform."

I am sure the road to regulation and credentialism in the midwife professiom was paved with the good intentions of women who had unfortunately been the victims of botched home births and/or midwife incompetence.

This outcome makes things worse, not better, though, for the reasons outlined by @Kitty Tantrum.

What they DO NOT want is to overhaul the medical system.

Every time there has ever been an "overhaul of the medical system" (the most recent -- but by no means the first -- being Obamacare in 2010-2013), it has been exactly what "they" wanted.

There is no way any societal institution -- let alone the Medical System -- is going to be overhauled without "them" having the final say so.

(Speculation, of course. Unlike the statistics I posted.)

So you conducted the "studies" and collected those statistics yourself/observed them with your own eyes?

Because otherwise it is indeed speculation.

It is anyone's guess which of the so-called "official statistics" out there are true and which are lies, exaggerations, and misdirection.

 

[Blade Runner]

I'm saying to befriend boomers. Most great girls that I meet have all kinds of BS requirements that are shown to be nonsense once you are in their personal lives, and the fastest way for a millenial or zoomer to join such a girl's social circle is via her parents. It works for me, it works for my friends too.

I liked it because I hope you are right, but I've met even immigrant parents that are orthodox and they surprisingly thought it odd that I wanted to marry their younger daughter, lol

 

[Blade Runner]

You can be lucky too. I am below average in several measures you are probably better than me. I'm telling you guys expanding your social circle works. You might not marry some random older person or woman you are not attracted to, but go ahead and make friends with them anyways, because you might put a ring on their friend, daughter, or sister.

Yes, this is good advice, but most here probably still think (as jose stated) that you have lower standards - including me.

 

[sophistic-ated]

I liked it because I hope you are right, but I've met even immigrant parents that are orthodox and they surprisingly thought it odd that I wanted to marry their younger daughter, lol

I know that I am right because it I am doing it right now and seeing results. Same goes for my friends in similar situations.

Never dated a girl with a BMI over 20, nor someone that I did not face competition over, and only one out of many was a instathot. Any standards beyond that is probably pointy elbow criticism.

 

[Optimus Princeps]

I know that I am right because it I am doing it right now and seeing results. Same goes for my friends in similar situations.

Never dated a girl with a BMI over 20, nor someone that I did not face competition over, and only one out of many was a instathot. Any standards beyond that is probably pointy elbow criticism.

Just speaking for myself my standards are higher than just not overweight or an instathot and I don't think that's unreasonable.

 

[josemiguel]

Wrong on all counts. I live along Roosh's last tour route.

Where is this American Mecca of debt free virgins with no tatoos?

I will conquistar it for La Raza.

What are abysmally low standards?

Pretty, thin and not an instathot is an abysmally low standard for a wife.

I like pretty skinny women within my ethnic group.

That rules out 85% of the women in your ethnic group if you are American.

Never dated a girl with a BMI over 20

The average US woman's BMI is 29.6 with a standard deviation of 3.1. This means you are dating exclusively the top .3% of US women health-wise. Or you are American of Asian persuasion.

I am far above average and had a much healthier population to pick from, I don't think I can make that same claim. Plus I've historically liked healthy thiccness.

If I was Mexican, I'd be in the same boat as Americans in terms of general population health quality.

Any standards beyond that is probably pointy elbow criticism

A gentle and quiet spirit isn't "pointy elbow criticism."

 

[Starlight]

Yes, this is good advice, but most here probably still think (as jose stated) that you have lower standards - including me.

Best advice: Don’t play the PUA game until you’re 40 to decide to settle down... All the worth while girls will have been snatched up looong ago. And I don’t blame the immigrant parents for giving you a side eye… I’ll be 41 when my daughter is 20 (the age I myself was married) and would think it very strange for a man two decades older to want to marry my daughter… just a thought.

 

[josemiguel]

I’ll be 41 when my daughter is 20 (the age I myself was married) and would think it very strange for a man two decades older to want to marry my daughter

Ah, AngloSaxon repulsion to age gaps.

Or an honest appraisal that your daughter won't be considered marriageable by any man with wisdom.

Don’t play the PUA game until you’re 40 to decide to settle down

"Don't go to med school and become a doctor. No young lady would want to marry that, no parent would want such a son-in-law!"

I think I know why the demographic future of El Norte is looking great for my children.

 

[Pray_Everyday]

I am sorry you had a bad experience with a so-called "midwife."

However, this is not a good reason, IMO, to support increased System/State regulation.

If anything, it is likely the reason you got such a bad midwife was precisely because there are so many regulation, and so normal, Christian women with responsibilities and families to raise are not going to have time or willingness to jump through the System's hoops.

This "midwife" you hired, was she herself married? Did she have children?

Also, on another note, I notice oftentimes when a person suffers a tragedy, traumatic experience, or injustice, and there is nothing that can be done to "turn back the clock," he will often get involved in political campaigns thar promise to "fix" the supposed issue that made him suffer.

For example, people who have had a child be the victim of murder may get involved in anti-gun politics.

People who have had a daughter or sister suffer in an abusive marriage may get involved in political/social campaigns in favor of easy no-fault divorce and harsher sentences for male abusers.

Those who have lost a family member to drug addiction may campaign for tougher drug laws, as well as state programs that force (secular) "treatment" on unwilling addicts.

Those who have been alienated from a family member due to the latter's depression, incompetence, or insanity may campaign in favor of state funding for "mental health services," as well as coercive laws that mandate sufferers to receive "treatment."

Etc.

"That person/business wronged me. And since the State will not allow me to confront them directly and put a stop to it, then maybe we can at least petition the State regulate them, thereby indirectly putting a stop to it."

But what they don't see is that while these campaigns they engage in might make them feel like they are "doing something" -- and their hearts may really be in the right place -- once the new "regulations" get put into place, the nee system ends up being just as bad or worse than the old one.

They are petitioning the System to fix a probelm that was more than likely caused or greatly worsened by the System to begin with.

In fact, the System uses grieving families as pawns in their campaign for "social reform."

I am sure the road to regulation and credentialism in the midwife professiom was paved with the good intentions of women who had unfortunately been the victims of botched home births and/or midwife incompetence.

This outcome makes things worse, not better, though, for the reasons outlined by @Kitty Tantrum.

Every time there has ever been an "overhaul of the medical system" (the most recent -- but by no means the first -- being Obamacare in 2010-2013), it has been exactly what "they" wanted.

There is no way any societal institution -- let alone the Medical System -- is going to be overhauled without "them" having the final say so.

So you conducted the "studies" and collected those statistics yourself/observed them with your own eyes?

Because otherwise it is indeed speculation.

It is anyone's guess which of the so-called "official statistics" out there are true and which are lies, exaggerations, and misdirection.

I appreciate your response, and respectful tone. I will attempt to address all the points you listed, but after this it would perhaps be best that we make separate thread on the Ladies forum to continue this discussion and not clog up/derail this thread.


First off, the statistics I referred to in 2 of my posts actually prove that using a midwife is safe - in Europe. Where the word "midwife" is used to refer to a woman who has gone through nursing school and is medically qualified. The (non college educated) direct entry American midwives will show prospective clients these European statistics in order to claim it is safe. It wasn't just the one I hired, but 2 other ones we interviewed (more on this later) who pulled out the same European statistics. It is a matter of comparing apples to oranges.


In my original post regarding this topic I never even mentioned using an obgyn, or that they were preferable. I simply said (factually) that American direct entry midwives use statistics from Europe to prove to prove that what they are offering (which is not the same service) is safe. Here is my first post in its entirety.

I apologize to everyone for the threadjack, but in the list of occupations that you listed there is one - which I've bolded- in which it is important to the client's safety to know whether or not the person they have hired is "qualified". There is a reason why in the US these direct entry midwives use statistics from European countries, which use midwives that are also college educated trained nurses, to attempt to prove that using them is safe.

Besides, in more recent times some of the states have been making it easier for unqualified and unregistered individuals to offer these services. Perhaps more injured or dead babies is part of the agenda...

As you can see, the word 'obgyn' was never even mentioned. The other poster responded by attacking obgyns, and the medical industrial complex - which I also, quite frankly, detest. I admit I let my emotional woman side take over and let myself get distracted but my original point remains- if it is safe to use uneducated midwives, why do they only show statistics from Europe? Could it be because the statistics from the US are less than stellar?

(And yes, the majority of births will turn out fine. But wouldn't those straightforward births have turned out also fine in the absence of an uneducated birth attendant? In the case of an actual emergency what life-saving aid can an uneducated woman provide, besides dialing 911 and hoping her client gets to the professionals in time.)

The examples I gave that (imo) prove more education is needed are not even necessarily specific to the midwife I hired. I don't want to post links, because I worry it will be indecent and lewd, but as I've found out more recently there are a whole lot (the majority?) of midwives that believe, among other things, that sex acts should be connected with childbirth (whether it's the husband and wife, or even the midwife to the birthing mother), that - as mentioned in another post- cannibalism should take place, and that have a grade school -or worse- understanding of basic hygiene. It was not just specific to this midwife, is my point. These things are not mentioned by the midwives until long after the clients have handed over the nonrefundable payment. Why the secrecy?

I agree with your point about a busy Christian family woman not having the time to get the education needed to be a registered nurse midwife. Yes, the midwife we hired was married, with children, whom she homeschooled. As I mentioned she was not a Christian, but she knew that we were. The reason she was picked over the other options was because they were full blown woke SJW and this one was not. As I mentioned in one of my reply posts, she described herself as 'holistic`, a label which I've now become wary of because of this experience. As I've said before in this thread, when we asked about the methodology of anything related to the labour and birth all we got for an answer was a vague "we have our ways". This was the same answer from all the midwives we spoke to. Once again, why the secrecy?

You are also correct that often times more regulation results in worse results. The path to hell is paved with good intentions, true. At the same time, if any random person is able to set up shop in their living room delivering babies, lies about the safety of said activity (while waving around European statistics that don't apply), and then there is no recourse for the people that get hurt, well, this is a problem. You yourself admit that some women or babies have been hurt. I thank God every day that my son and I are alive and well and all we lost is our money.

You are correct about people who have been hurt taking on an "activism" role, though rather than to turn back the clock I would say it is simply to help any other potentials from being victims. In the end, if someone knows all the facts and wants to go through with it that is their business, and between them and God. Perhaps they don't have a conviction that engaging in sex acts during labor (or to induce labor) is wrong, perhaps they dont believe that by trying to make childbirth pleasurable or "orgasmic" (their words, not mine) they are acting in direct defiance of God, etc. But it is wrong for women to get trapped into this unaware, and as I mentioned in a previous post, we did not know that these things would be heavily pressured by the midwife. There needs to be a conversation about things to beware of among Christians, rather than people just saying they once knew a midwife who was Christian and had not (yet?) had any bad outcomes.

Regarding an overhaul of the medical system, I wasn't talking strictly about the finance side of it, or insurance. I meant the reasons why women choose to use midwives instead. Obgyns abuse women physically, force them into medical procedures they do not want, often against their informed consent. Some women want to give birth in random positions, or decline some of these medical procedures, others want to delay the newborn assessment, etc. In recent times hospitals have done some things to attempt to meet women halfway, but more is needed (and realistically is not going to happen). There are horrible, pushy or negligent doctors out there and some women are victims of this.

These women are primed to be taken advantage of by midwives (as I was, and others out there have been as well). I believe (hence I said speculation) that this is by design, "controlled opposition" if you will. On baby/pregnancy forums anytime a woman expresses dissatisfaction or trauma regarding a hospital birth the response universally given is "hire a midwife instead!"; it is never "maybe women should be educated on how to stand up for their patient rights at hospitals" or "if a doctor does a procedure against consent it should be considered assault". It is never focused on how to better navigate or outsmart the system, but rather to take an (arguably less safe) alternate option. And even if the safety issues are brought up, never is the subversive - and frankly perverted - ideology of many (most?) midwives mentioned. It's hard to beware things that no one mentions to beware.

 

[Starlight]

Ah, AngloSaxon repulsion to age gaps.

Or an honest appraisal that your daughter won't be considered marriageable by any man with wisdom.

Do you even have any kids? You would give your daughter to a man 20 years older than her?

"Don't go to med school and become a doctor. No young lady would want to marry that, no parent would want such a son-in-law!"

Yes, don’t go to Med-school or law school or any of that bs. Marry your wife young and create a life together that is yours alone and actually meaningful.

 

[messaggera]

I’ll be 41 when my daughter is 20 (the age I myself was married) and would think it very strange for a man two decades older to want to marry my daughter… just a thought.

The life expectancy at the age of forty (globally on average) peaked around 1900.

When did the notion of a two decade age gap becoming socially acceptable? For a young girl to not marry a suitor around her age, but a much older man? How is this arrangement beneficial to both the individuals and society?

Sure there are similar age gaps now, but they are seen mostly with celebrities or women looking to secure wealth.

Where in history, after the 1900’s, was this notion being pushed and why? It is perceived that older men (50 60s) should be looking to marry twenty year olds? Is really the message?

Sincere

Older Men, Younger Women

Ladies, have you ever dated an older man or had a friend that dated one? I'm curious how younger women view these relationships since it seems the Western media these days likes to mock those May-December couples. You always hear comments like, "Oh, she must have daddy issues" or something to...

www.rooshvforum.com

 

[Akaky Akakievitch]

I'm happy to move this over to the thread suggested here as this post is probably more relevant over there.

Do you even have any kids? You would give your daughter to a man 20 years older than her?

My dad is 17 years older than my mom. They've been divorced for 20 years now but growing up I always reflected on the age gap and whether it was right or wrong.

I always marvelled at how Romeo was 18 and Juliet was 14 in the famous love story - by today's legal standards he would be a paedophile lol. How times have changed.

I just searched this one up: The Virgin Mary is estimated to have been somewhere between 14-17 when she was betrothed to Joseph, some go as low as 12 though we'll never know for certain.

I'm not saying this justifies anything in our day and age but thought it was worth pointing out, maybe much of it is cultural. I'm aware of the term ephebophilia (interesting to note from the article: "Generally, the preference is not regarded by psychologists as a pathology, as long as it does not interfere with other major areas of one's life"), but for some men they don't get it together until much later on.

Whereas, women tend to mature rather quickly and from a much younger age seem to know what they want. Dudes may need more time to establish their careers fully, make many mistakes and explore their ambitions, this can take years or even a couple decades (I know these are vast generalisations so forgive me, i'm just speaking of natural tendencies)

Women's peak attraction is anywhere from during late teens to late 20's/early 30's, whereas most men don't gain their full masculine looks until age 35+ oftentimes. There are many examples of male actors or celebrities with cutesy babyfaces well into their late 20's, and then somewhere in their 30's the masculinity takes it up a notch. For example, I'm 28 and could pass as a teenager with my babyface, think Michael J Fox in BTTF. I know women with better facial hair than me. I'm not saying I want uber-rugged masculinity but some younger women may find me in my 30's more attractive vs me in my early 20's, when i probably looked underdeveloped and babyish to the same age group.

The life expectancy at the age of forty (globally on average) peaked around 1900.

When did the notion of a two decade age gap becoming socially acceptable? For a young girl to not marry a suitor around her age, but a much older man? How is this arrangement beneficial to both the individuals and society?

Sure there are similar age gaps now, but they are seen mostly with celebrities or women looking to secure wealth.

Where in history, after the 1900’s, was this notion being pushed and why? It is perceived that older men (50 60s) should be looking to marry twenty year olds? Is really the message?

Sincere

Older Men, Younger Women

Ladies, have you ever dated an older man or had a friend that dated one? I'm curious how younger women view these relationships since it seems the Western media these days likes to mock those May-December couples. You always hear comments like, "Oh, she must have daddy issues" or something to...

www.rooshvforum.com

You make a good point about life expectancy. But if we take the traditional view that men are the head of the household and provide for the rest of the family, doesn't it stand that in some cases men make their real success much later in life after making a host of mistakes, and they've matured through their erroneous ways? Women (trad's at least) like to be led, and an older guy of 10-20+ years is naturally gifted at that, one would expect.

I'm not sure what I think about this yet, but just exploring different viewpoints. If it works for others, then surely an age gap is not a big deal but a matter of personal preferences. Maybe I'm turning into my father who knows...!

 

[Blade Runner]

Best advice: Don’t play the PUA game until you’re 40 to decide to settle down... All the worth while girls will have been snatched up looong ago. And I don’t blame the immigrant parents for giving you a side eye… I’ll be 41 when my daughter is 20 (the age I myself was married) and would think it very strange for a man two decades older to want to marry my daughter… just a thought.

Yes, this is funny, as neither reality nor good men care about your feelings. History doesn't either. Why even "play the PUA game" - also not worth it. Anyone paying attention around here for 5-10 years knows what goes on if there are games, and it goes unstated, and for good reason. But I'll bite, Starlight: If you knew and trusted me, with resources wisdom and solid income, you'd still let your feelings over my age (let's say 40) stop a good man from marrying your daughter? So that she can have a questionable future with a more questionable guy her age, presuming also you'd let her choose that guy? I find that at best amusing, at worst silly. So tell me, what's the real reason why you find it "strange"?