Finding a Husband during Corona

messaggera

Woodpecker
Woman
So you see, it's become very fashionable to take the Biblical responsibility of submission from wives and twist it to turn it into submission that is ultimately generated by male headship.

In all honesty submission really is not a Biblical or Christian topic, but rather an example of a successful loving family model.

Men and women are NOT created equal.
No family can have two Alpha type personalities competing for leadership; and the supporting research/case study are out there to review.
 
In all honesty submission really is not a Biblical or Christian topic, but rather an example of a successful loving family model.

Men and women are NOT created equal.
No family can have two Alpha type personalities competing for leadership; and the supporting research/case study are out there to review.
It's not only right, it's also Biblical:

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Ephesians 5:22-24

Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
1 Peter 3:1-6

In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
1 Timothy 2:9-15
 

messaggera

Woodpecker
Woman
It's not only right, it's also Biblical:

Yes. I know.

But you have to go beyond the Bible to present the proposal to a diverse range of individuals.

If you are proposing the “submission works in a husband and wife marriage” to a secular audience you have to show them why it works outside from what the Bible states.

And allow a female to come to her own reasoning on why it is not only right, but works in a successful marriage model.
However, choosing of a husband (for her to model this behavior) is going to relay on the male to be an honorable man.

The most honorable man is a man that places Christ in his heart.
 

Kitty Tantrum

Woodpecker
Woman
Long post incoming, fair warning: :blush:

First I want to back up a little bit to the discussion about men vs. women doing the approaching and asking. I had to dip out of that conversation suddenly because my own husband got home from fishing! But I wanted to come back to it because I think I've settled on my position:

SITUATIONAL AWARENESS IS KEY. The reason we tend to devolve into "ifs" and "buts" when postulating hypotheticals here is because there are too many variables in most situations to settle on any kind of hard-and-fast rule.

There are times and situations wherein it is appropriate for women to do the approaching/asking. I do believe, however, that this tends to be the exception rather than the rule, and falls within a certain set of particulars having much to do with propriety. And any woman who finds herself in such a position ought to pay close attention in order to discern whether her active role was brought about by situational necessity - or whether the man has a timid (or lazy, or entitled) personality that may prove problematic down the road. Big difference. Same can be said on the other hand, too - men should cautiously consider whether it was situationally appropriate for a woman to approach/ask, or whether this is possibly indicative of an aggressive temperament.

In terms of the double-standard of it being "creepy" or otherwise not socially appropriate for a man to ask a woman out in certain situations - but socially acceptable/not creepy for the woman to do the asking... please understand that as a woman who has never subscribed to the double-standards peddled by feminism, I am certainly not calibrated that way. Many of the women who have best resisted the decay of modernity are not calibrated that way. We are not so far-removed from our nature as to make something like that comfortable - regardless of whether we've been given permission socially.

Of course I know in my head that as a woman, I can "get away with" behaviors that would be deemed creepy for men. I've cracked jokes about being able to get away with murder most of my life - and eventually realized it's really only kind of a joke. I KNOW the double-standard exists. But in my heart, in my gut, AND in my head, I know darned well that even if it's not "creepy" to approach a man (although TBH I feel creepy) - it's BRAZEN. It's forward. It's scandalous. It's not demure. There's a whole different set of reasons for women to be hesitant about approaching men - and they are entirely valid, in spite of modernity's attempts to abolish or distract from them.

Some other things relevant to recent discussion:

Remember that pretty much everyone has been hurt by someone/something.
Everybody will have their things that they are sensitive about. And everybody has flaws. But those flaws and traumas might be TOTALLY DIFFERENT from what you assume at first blush.

One thing we can all agree on is that when you meet someone initially, you don't know a darned thing about them. It's a disservice to YOURSELF to assume that they are representative of the average of your expectations/experiences, and a disservice to THEM to blindly treat them as such. Good men (and good women) are rare. This does not make it healthy to approach every interaction with the attitude of "yeah you're probably trash like all the rest, prove me wrong by jumping through these hoops."

I've been with men who seemed to think they "had women figured out" based on whatever experience they had that entitled them to feel so cocky - and proceeded to treat me like and expected me to behave in kind like every other woman they'd been with. What I've learned is that it's not possible to prove myself anything else to a man who essentially doesn't believe that the "true" me actually exists. Men who assume I'm putting on a front and set about to poke holes in it or to play "gotcha" trying to "test" or "expose me" as something I'm honest-to-god NOT... ain't worth the time of day.

Ladies, avoid trying to appease the glint of suspicion - and seek instead for the spark of recognition in a man's eyes.

RE: paying for dates...
I've seen quite a few men on the internet with this attitude of "not paying for first dates because feminism." But I suspect that most of these men would change their tune pretty quickly and pretty neatly if they perceived a very strong opportunity to get what they wanted from the interaction by sucking it up and paying for a first date.

I don't know about the men in this conversation specifically, but in the past when I've posed the question to men voicing similar opinions, they've mostly all agreed that if the first date somehow ends up including sex BEFORE anyone ever has to pull out a wallet or purse and pay for a meal or activity... they would pay.

This is quantitative ($$$) rather than qualitative (principled) reasoning. This is purely transactional risk/benefit/ROI type stuff. There are no high horses in this field, fellas. It also rewards women for behaving like WHORES, and disqualifies women with self-respect and discipline. If you think the woman sitting at the table with you is a manipulative whore who is not worth the cost of her company and conversation for the duration of a meal... why are you wasting any of your time with her? Hoping to extract a little of the "only value she has" - ??? Hmmmmm? Can you hear the moral high ground calling? It's waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over there. Far away from where you are.

Direct advice for the ladies RE: paying for dates... I'll offer up that the small handful of times I've been so bold as to do the inviting (always men I already knew, never strangers), I've also done the paying - for both of us. I feel like that's just good form - if you're going to stray from the traditional in the first place. This was always well-received; the men in question knew me well enough already to know it was a token of genuine affection and esteem, not any kind of feminist display.

And there was one time when my husband and I were early dating, we were driving past an ice cream place that only accepts cash, and he didn't have any, but made the suggestion that if I did, we could stop and grab some ice cream. No clue if he intended that as a "test" of any sort - but it did occur to me that there ARE women who would have balked at that (instead of being like "YES" and excitedly pointing to the off-ramp before he could finish getting all the words out), and possibly even demanded that he find an ATM instead. Definitely don't be like that.

What I would probably do in a hypothetical scenario wherein (God forbid) I had to find another husband, and I somehow ended up asked out on a date where the guy expected me to pay at the end... is look the guy dead in the eye and be like "Ohhhhhh, one of those dual-income lifestylers." Then I would graciously pay for BOTH of our meals. And then tell him I'm not looking for a pimp, wish him good luck, and goodnight, and take my leave.

REJECTION: I observe that a LOT of men seem to assume that women are simply less impacted by rejection than men are (thus they risk less by asking), and I would EXHORT these men to reconsider carrying this assumption around, as it will likely not serve them well, because it is no truer for women as a rule than it is for men.

My husband actually did something pretty egregious very early on in our relationship based on this sort of assumption, and if I had not already known him well enough to discern and understand cognitively that he was operating on a faulty set of assumptions rather than knowingly disrespecting me outright because he didn't care about hurting me... that would have been the end of the road. Just because you don't get to witness a woman's reaction to such a rejection doesn't mean it doesn't happen. He didn't find out until years later that I'd cried myself to sleep and felt awful for days. He was shocked, because at the time he thought I took it all in stride and never missed a beat. If we hadn't ended up married, he never would have known. And this was a pretty big thing. Women can hide all sorts of things very well. Not all women are heartless and impervious like some men seem to think (based on having historically sought these women out for casual sex).

Try to consider the shortcomings of others in light of your own. Remember that everyone is a sinner. Try not to impose "relationship dealbreakers" that are based on idealism or egoism; these should be things that actually break the relationship (and for which resolution has been sought and exhausted) - not frivolous, arbitrary, or hypocritical disqualifiers. If you are approaching prospective spouses from the angle of finding as much fault as you can, disqualifying as many as you can - rather than from the angle of forgiving as much imperfection as you can... you are doing it wrong.

Speaking in broad terms because it's a sensitive subject: the egregious thing my husband did early on, was to completely ditch his plans with me (which HE MADE) to hook up with someone else. Even given that our "relationship" at the time was one of fornication and understood to not be binding or exclusive... that was PRETTY BAD.

At the same time, though, as someone who had kind of knowingly and resignedly gone down the path of degeneracy (first marriage, which I've written about elsewhere), rather than walking it blindly, that also ended up being a big turning point for me - the realization that, even though what he did was at least a horrible social faux pas - even if not a violation of whatever you want to call the relationship agreement we had at the time (much more a matter of WHEN rather than who/what/where, shall we say)... whose fault was it that I had ended up in such an ambiguous situation with so much potential for heartache, based on a guy acting in what looked to be nothing more than an impulsive, opportunistic, and clueless sort of way? Whose fault was it that I was in an awkward and horrifying position wherein I didn't even know whether it was appropriate to voice an objection at the time? MINE. lol A good half of why I cried my eyes out was because I just felt STUPID. And rightly so!

I feel like it would have been wildly hypocritical if I had considered that a dealbreaker and just decided that I couldn't/wouldn't see him anymore. Which I thought about! I mean, it was pretty bad. I was pretty devastated/embarrassed/humiliated. Under traditionally "normal" circumstances, or anything resembling, that sort of thing happening might be grounds even for ending a marriage. But it's not like I had any actual moral high ground. We were both really obviously lost and mucking around. My own failures and shortcomings afforded me the capacity to understand and forgive... so why would I NOT?

THE MASK ISSUE:

I'd recommend that any woman looking for a husband in an area where masks are prevalent... simply find any and every excuse not to wear one. Or to leave it down most of the time. I recommend a very passive and feminine approach (like if a shopkeeper or employer asks you to put it on, simply do so, smile with your eyes, and say something disarming like "sorry, just really needed a breath"), but do NOT just resign yourself to wearing one all the time. There are a lot of men out there right now who will look at a woman defying the mandate even in a small way and immediately recognize her potential. I've literally seen men do this calculation when they see me roll my eyes and pull my scarf down before I'm out the door at the grocery store. They're usually on their way in while I'm on my way out, and I don't give them the opportunity to approach - but if I were a single woman looking, the opportunity would definitely be there.

It goes along with "situational awareness" that I do NOT recommend automatically disqualifying any man who EVER wears a mask. There are a lot of situations wherein it is NOT WISE to be the person pushing back on that issue. It is NOT every person's job to engage in this specific form of civil disobedience in every imaginable situation. What you want to avoid outright are the men who think that wearing a mask actually makes anybody safer from the imaginary pandemic. Somewhere in between "compliant when they don't have to be" and "gonna get hauled away to jail for punching the grocery store clerk who told him to put the mask on" is probably good.

<3
 

OutlawJustice

Sparrow
Woman
Outed myself as...?

Pay close attention, dear "sisters" of mine... Coupla fellas in here demonstrating exactly what not to look for in a man. ;)
Yeah why are MGTOWs giving girls advice on how to find a husband to be happy w/ during Corona? :laughter:


Two people couldn't stick to the topic.

 
Last edited:

OutlawJustice

Sparrow
Woman
What I have found very useful w/ the helpful advice here is looking for a
potential husband in holy places and praying for him. That spoke to me.

Churches are one of the few places still gathering during corona.
 
What I have found very useful w/ the helpful advice here is looking for a
potential husband in holy places and praying for him. That spoke to me.

Churches are one of the few places still gathering during corona.
Don't forget to pray in specifics. God is a God of specifics. You can also have other people pray for you. I'm adding you and your future husband to my prayer list right now; so there's 1.
 

Ah_Tibor

Robin
Woman
Yeah why are MGTOWs giving girls advice on how to find a husband to be happy w/ during Corona? :laughter:


Two people couldn't stick to the topic.


At least we know they're not bots? Everyone here needs to chill though lol

Maybe I'm an optimist, but I genuinely think if one puts one's best foot forward, and is open to the prospect of getting married, it will happen. Too often people fail because they are really looking for reasons for it to fail in attempt to be proven right--which is due to some kind of pride probably.

It's actually a great opportunity to reach out to people you haven't talked to right now. "Just checking in" is a more than valid reason. Work into conversation that you're looking to get out more, looking for marriagable men etc. Look into volunteer opportunities (animal shelter, homeless shelter, libraries are kinda weird right now but may be worth it if that's your thing). I think a lot of people are feeling the social isolation. See if female friends want to get lunch. Reach out to relatives or older friends. There are plenty of good guys out there, and they probably are in the same position as you!
 
Last edited:

This is the type of nonsense that you are fighting against. Although this type of thing will mostly keep the betas away...

I think male/female sexuality and marriage is just so broken right now. The whole thing has become corrupted to unrecognizable levels.

I think the only good thing is that it forces you to rely upon Jesus. That's what He does, though... He is a God of the impossible, He can do for you what you can't do for yourself.

Any dates or prospects?
 

OutlawJustice

Sparrow
Woman

This is the type of nonsense that you are fighting against. Although this type of thing will mostly keep the betas away...

I think male/female sexuality and marriage is just so broken right now. The whole thing has become corrupted to unrecognizable levels.

I think the only good thing is that it forces you to rely upon Jesus. That's what He does, though... He is a God of the impossible, He can do for you what you can't do for yourself.

Any dates or prospects?
Prospects - yes. There is a contractor in my office room whom I seen w/o a mask, identified as based, seems to enjoy conversing w/ me. How would a woman screen a man for being Christian?
 

Vigilant

Woodpecker
Woman
I think most people get married within some kind of social group. I'd let it be known to friends, friends of friends, relatives etc. (the ones you like/trust) that you are looking and available. You'd be surprised how many people probably know of someone through a pipeline.
Exceptionally wise counsel.
God created providence for a reason! And the faith to believe it:)
 

Chains of Peter

Woodpecker
Don't even think about getting married until the war is over.

Unfortunately, by then you'll find that the sex ratios are skewed in favor of men.
 

DanielaEverheart

Pigeon
Woman
I've never been more grateful to already have a husband than since this whole PLANdemic kicked off.

That being said, I have noticed current circumstances have the effect of separating the wheat from the chaff a bit. You might see a tall, objectively handsome, masculine looking man in the checkout lane... except he doesn't take his mask off as he exits the store, and instead keeps wearing it as he dodges around the scary unmasked people in the parking lot, gets into his car and drives away, still wearing the stupid mask... BOOM, DISQUALIFIED.

Anyone who is actually worried about meeting in person because they're afraid of catching "COVID" - DISQUALIFIED.

Anyone who gets the vaccine - DISQUALIFIED.

Learn to sniff out fear. Don't go anywhere near the men who reek of it.

Even and especially if you yourself still entertain or harbor the notion that this is a real pandemic instead of the globalist scam that it is. The last thing ANY woman needs is a man who makes decisions based on fear and the desire for safety and security. That's feminine behavior.
I couldn't agree with you more.
 

Vigilant

Woodpecker
Woman
I've never been more grateful to already have a husband than since this whole PLANdemic kicked off.

That being said, I have noticed current circumstances have the effect of separating the wheat from the chaff a bit. You might see a tall, objectively handsome, masculine looking man in the checkout lane... except he doesn't take his mask off as he exits the store, and instead keeps wearing it as he dodges around the scary unmasked people in the parking lot, gets into his car and drives away, still wearing the stupid mask... BOOM, DISQUALIFIED.

Anyone who is actually worried about meeting in person because they're afraid of catching "COVID" - DISQUALIFIED.

Anyone who gets the vaccine - DISQUALIFIED.

Learn to sniff out fear. Don't go anywhere near the men who reek of it.

Even and especially if you yourself still entertain or harbor the notion that this is a real pandemic instead of the globalist scam that it is. The last thing ANY woman needs is a man who makes decisions based on fear and the desire for safety and security. That's feminine behavior.
They sacrificed freedom for security; just as women do. Conviction makes all the difference in both men and women.
 
So true! Everything you said. Guys like this are soyboy losers who should not reproduce.
Some one had to train us in this way.
I am an older man, and all I can remember is that the women always wanted the men to talk about our feelings etc.
Basically men are simple creatures, show us Love and appreciation and affection, and there is nothing a real man would not do for their wives. (Including giving up their lives) Instead of bliss, all we (men and women) have is a power struggle. Everybody knows that the ship cannot have two Captains.
 
Top