• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

A dating daughter is a father's failure

MemeFan said:
I'm currently reading book Positive Intelligence. Basic idea of book is existence of 10 psyhcological saboteurs. Judge as main one with 9 helpers.

You here are so real example of saboteur hyper-rational.

Let's give example:

Wifey is cooking and husband grabs her from behind. Wife should "relax into husband" because:

1. Lord says so, it's husband want. It's rules.

Perfect example of hyper-rational. Logic and thinking are only thinks that matter. Off course, such mind is perfectly fine with rules.

How about this:

2. To sense his desire for her, to sense being wanted.

Truth is: "I think, I exist". Truth is also: "I feel, I exist".

From hyper-rational sabouter perspective feelings and emotions are so 🤮🤮🤮🤮.

@steve, @Keith Martin and @HomesteadWife

I sense so much focus on ideal archetype and "It's total catastrophype if we leave archetype for a second". How about leaving bloody rules and logic behind and experiencing love?

Like dancing. Man still has to lead. But good dancer is sensitive to female's movement and wishes. Interesting, bodies moving in unison without his barking orders.

Movement, passion, cooperation instead of bureucrat opening rule book.

And for finale, one heretical thought:

Would Lord prefer you being less obsessed with following rules and more willing to spend time with Him for Him and practice experiential experience with Him?

Remember, Pharisees were master rule followers. Still got spanked.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for anyone else mentioned. In general my personality type tends toward logic (female INTJ) and less about emotion.

That being said my husband and I are dancers. We were in a dance competition and placed in the finals the first night we met, so obviously in our relationship there was a response to each other on a Passionate emotional and physical level. To dance well you have to start out with knowing basic rules, steps, and practicing them consistently again and again in order for them to become part of how you move and dance. Once you know and have internalized these thing you have greater freedom and emotional expression when dancing. You can play, passionately respond to your partner on a more emotional and intuitive level, and be more creative together BECAUSE you have the grounding in basic rules and are not constantly stepping on each others toes. You both understand the basics and the leader can truly lead because the follower knows how to respond to his cues and vice versa.

Having a relationship with the creator for me is about love. His love for me by sending Yeshua even though I did not deserve it.

Love is not all about emotion though. Often love is shown by action rather than words and emotions (because those cannot constantly be present). Getting swept up in emotion can lead to following heart and coming to unbiblical personal belief system. Where because you feel it is right you ignore what YHVH actually said about the subject.

Because you love you want to do what the other person desires and what makes them happy. A relationship with YHVH often starts with, what is in it for me (salvation). Gradually as you grow in your relationship you want to do everything you can to please Him, thus following more of the guidance(rules) He has laid out to do so. Not because of fear, but because of a passionate love and desire to know, love, and serve Him more fully because of all He has done.

In day to day life I try to do what I have come to believe is right because I know it will lead to greater love.

Yeshua criticized the pharisees not for observing the rules, but forgetting the heart behind them. That of doing your best to do what He wants out of love. Even if we are constantly messing up He knows we are trying.
 
Last edited:
I get the feeling people are talking past each other. Male headship does not in any way preclude love, in fact it demands it - the one thing a man is most bluntly instructed to do is to "love his wife" (right where she is bluntly instructed to submit to him).

In a healthy relationship, both husband and wife will collaborate (e.g. discuss all the pros and cons of a decision), and have the husband be in charge (e.g. be the one to make the final decision particularly if the two cannot agree). Like dancing - both respond to each other, yet one still decides what direction to move. The two function in collaborative harmony as a single body, yet with a single head. These aspects are not in conflict, they're both necessary parts of the whole.

Is the argument largely because you're each talking about different sides of a truth you all actually agree with?
 
FollowingHim said:
I get the feeling people are talking past each other. Male headship does not in any way preclude love, in fact it demands it - the one thing a man is most bluntly instructed to do is to "love his wife" (right where she is bluntly instructed to submit to him).

In a healthy relationship, both husband and wife will collaborate (e.g. discuss all the pros and cons of a decision), and have the husband be in charge (e.g. be the one to make the final decision particularly if the two cannot agree). Like dancing - both respond to each other, yet one still decides what direction to move. The two function in collaborative harmony as a single body, yet with a single head. These aspects are not in conflict, they're both necessary parts of the whole.

Is the argument largely because you're each talking about different sides of a truth you all actually agree with?
Click to expand...
Yea, but how long it took to move emphasis from just ruke toward more holistic and correct view?
 
FollowingHim said:
I get the feeling people are talking past each other. Male headship does not in any way preclude love, in fact it demands it - the one thing a man is most bluntly instructed to do is to "love his wife" (right where she is bluntly instructed to submit to him).

In a healthy relationship, both husband and wife will collaborate (e.g. discuss all the pros and cons of a decision), and have the husband be in charge (e.g. be the one to make the final decision particularly if the two cannot agree). Like dancing - both respond to each other, yet one still decides what direction to move. The two function in collaborative harmony as a single body, yet with a single head. These aspects are not in conflict, they're both necessary parts of the whole.
Click to expand...
I can appreciate your dance metaphor.
FollowingHim said:
Is the argument largely because you're each talking about different sides of a truth you all actually agree with?
Click to expand...
MemeFan said:
Yea, but how long it took to move emphasis from just ruke toward more holistic and correct view?
Click to expand...
I think we all mostly agree on the destination but are placing different importance on the method we chose to get there. And where we choose to start. I don't agree with saying one way is THE correct view. But I am a strong believer in maps and directions in getting to an end goal.

Its like when you are traveling. Some place placing more emphasis on starting with a map, vehicle, concrete directions, timeline, and direct route. Some are more winging it and though the destination may be in mind they may also not care where they end up as long as it pleases their emotional needs. They are going to be more go with the flow, scenic route, chose different vehicles, and stop along the way to smell the flowers.
 
Last edited:
MeganC said:
So says legions of single men.
Click to expand...
And right there may identify where you've gone off the rails in your understanding -- because your response indicates that you believe men are single because they're unworthy, which couldn't be further from the truth.

I'll stipulate that a small percentage of men are single because they're unworthy, but that ignores that an even larger percentage of women are unworthy.

The increase in single men is due almost exclusively to two factors.

1. All data collected and analyzed points to a solid conclusion: women predominately determine when sex occurs, but men predominately determine when marriage occurs. Men are choosing to remain single at a much higher rate than are women, partly because of factor 2, but mainly because they've woken up to the fact that getting married is rigged against them, given that women are now initiating 75-80% of divorces and typically take those men to the cleaners.

2. Women have become delusional, and the evidence of this is that 80% of women consider 80% of men to be entirely unattractive, so those 80% of women are competing for 20% of the men, three-fourths of whom will never marry (mainly because they don't have to in order to have life-long active sex lives). [From my Substack essay on this: "Let that sink in: the top 80% of women considers the bottom 80% of men to be beneath minimum standards – and the majority (60%) of below-average women considers the majority (60%) of above-average men to be unqualified as sexual or marital partners. Whatever standards one uses, this means that the average woman rated as a 3/10 considers the average man rated as a 7/10 beneath her. Put another way, a 7 male isn’t good enough for a 3 female. This perception among women qualifies as straight-up delusional."]

By the time the typical woman now reaches the point of just beginning to lower her totally delusional standards, she will have become undesirable due to age, body count, or diminishing fertility to the vast amount of men anywhere on the SMV scale.

There are indeed legions of single men, but the legions of single women out-populate those men.
 
Last edited:
Joleneakamama said:
I shared this year's ago....kind of related me thinks.

A WOMAN'S QUESTION

Do you know you have asked for the costliest thing
ever made by the Hand above?
A woman's heart, and a woman's life-
and a woman's wonderful love.

Do you know you have asked for this priceless thing
as a child might ask for a toy?
Demanding what others have died to win,
With the reckless dash of a boy.

You have written my lesson of duty out;
Manlike, you have questioned me.
Now stand at the bar of my woman's soul
Until I shall question thee.

You require your mutton shall always be hot,
Your socks and your shirts be whole;
I require you heart to be true as God's stars
And as pure as His heaven your soul.

You require a cook for your mutton and beef,
I require a far greater thing;
A seamstress you're wanting for socks and shirts-
I look for a man and a king.

A king for this beautiful realm called home,
And a man that his maker, God,
Shall look upon as He did the first
And say: "It is very good."

I am fair and young, but the rose may fade
From my soft young cheek one day;
Will you love me then 'mid the falling leaves,
As you did 'mong the blossoms of may?

Is your heart an ocean so strong and deep,
I may launch my all on its tide?
A loving woman finds heaven or hell
On the day she is made a bride.

I require all things that are grand and true,
All things that a man should be;
If you give this all, I would stake my life
To be all you demand of me.

If you cannot be this, a laundress and cook
You can hire and little to pay;
But a woman's heart and a woman's life
Are not to be won that way.

Lena Lathrop
Click to expand...
Poetic and romantic, but flawed in this regard: women are wonderful -- I will always think that -- but all that prose ignores the fact that men are more precious to women than women are to men.
 
theleastofthese said:
This response is a complete exaggeration, full of assumptions about things I never implied or said; I wouldn't even know where to begin.

As far as Megan being your friend and open to criticism, that's between you and her. I didn't make my comment to defend Megan because she was bothered by the criticism; I made my comment because I was bothered by it.
Click to expand...
It was very clear to me that you were bothered by what I wrote to Megan.

And it is your right to exit the discussion, as well as it is my right to note that you've done so.
 
Joleneakamama said:
I shared this year's ago....kind of related me thinks.

A WOMAN'S QUESTION

Do you know you have asked for the costliest thing
ever made by the Hand above?
A woman's heart, and a woman's life-
and a woman's wonderful love.

Do you know you have asked for this priceless thing
as a child might ask for a toy?
Demanding what others have died to win,
With the reckless dash of a boy.

You have written my lesson of duty out;
Manlike, you have questioned me.
Now stand at the bar of my woman's soul
Until I shall question thee.

You require your mutton shall always be hot,
Your socks and your shirts be whole;
I require you heart to be true as God's stars
And as pure as His heaven your soul.

You require a cook for your mutton and beef,
I require a far greater thing;
A seamstress you're wanting for socks and shirts-
I look for a man and a king.

A king for this beautiful realm called home,
And a man that his maker, God,
Shall look upon as He did the first
And say: "It is very good."

I am fair and young, but the rose may fade
From my soft young cheek one day;
Will you love me then 'mid the falling leaves,
As you did 'mong the blossoms of may?

Is your heart an ocean so strong and deep,
I may launch my all on its tide?
A loving woman finds heaven or hell
On the day she is made a bride.

I require all things that are grand and true,
All things that a man should be;
If you give this all, I would stake my life
To be all you demand of me.

If you cannot be this, a laundress and cook
You can hire and little to pay;
But a woman's heart and a woman's life
Are not to be won that way.

Lena Lathrop
Click to expand...
I have to agree with @Keith Martin on this. The poem is indeed stirring but it indulges in the extreme fallacy that men are purely focused on mundane matters of physical comfort and sensual fulfillment and that women are almost exclusively focused on spiritual and moral matters.

The absurd example of this would the Homer/Marge Simpson depiction of men and women.

This of course does not comport with many of our observations of reality. It frequently appears to be the reversed in fact.
 
Keith Martin said:
And right there may identify where you've gone off the rails in your understanding -- because your response indicates that you believe men are single because they're unworthy, which couldn't be further from the truth.

I'll stipulate that a small percentage of men are single because they're unworthy, but that ignores that an even larger percentage of women are unworthy.

The increase in single men is due almost exclusively to two factors.

1. All data collected and analyzed points to a solid conclusion: women predominately determine when sex occurs, but men predominately determine when marriage occurs. Men are choosing to remain single at a much higher rate than are women, partly because of factor 2, but mainly because they've woken up to the fact that getting married is rigged against them, given that women are now initiating 75-80% of divorces and typically take those men to the cleaners.

2. Women have become straight-up delusional, and the evidence of this is that 80% of women consider 80% of men to be entirely unattractive, so those 80% of women are competing for 20% of the men, one-fourth of whom will never marry (mainly because they don't have to in order to have life-long active sex lives). [From my Substack essay on this: "Let that sink in: the top 80% of women considers the bottom 80% of men to be beneath minimum standards – and the majority (60%) of below-average women considers the majority (60%) of above-average men to be unqualified as sexual or marital partners. Whatever standards one uses, this means that the average woman rated as a 3/10 considers the average man rated as a 7/10 beneath her. Put another way, a 7 male isn’t good enough for a 3 female. This perception among women qualifies as straight-up delusional."]

By the time the typical woman now reaches the point of just beginning to lower her totally delusional standards, she will have become undesirable due to age, body count, or diminishing fertility to the vast amount of men anywhere on the SMV scale.

There are indeed legions of single men, but the legions of single women out-populate those men.
Click to expand...
And here you are wrong because you take women at face value.

All women claim they want best of best. Pure marketing. They always finish with something "affordable" for their level of "sexual value". So behaviour doesn't follow words.

Why would ugly woman admit she is OK with guy barely able to keep job? She knows she can't get better, but why to give false hope to even worse men?
 
The Revolting Man said:
I have to agree with @Keith Martin on this. The poem is indeed stirring but it indulges in the extreme fallacy that men are purely focused on mundane matters of physical comfort and sensual fulfillment and that women are almost exclusively focused on spiritual and moral matters.

The absurd example of this would the Homer/Marge Simpson depiction of men and women.

This of course does not comport with many of our observations of reality. It frequently appears to be the reversed in fact.
Click to expand...
I can't disagree with what @Keith Martin and @The Revolting Man have pointed out, there's nothing factually incorrect about it. However, a poem by its nature is incomplete and will always simplify everything. The poem @Joleneakamama shared emphasises the value of women and the considerations they must make prior to marriage. Those points it makes are valid. It cannot be expected to be complete nor completely balanced - it's art, not a theological treatise. It highlights only part of the whole, but that does not make the part it highlights invalid.
 
FollowingHim said:
I can't disagree with what @Keith Martin and @The Revolting Man have pointed out, there's nothing factually incorrect about it. However, a poem by its nature is incomplete and will always simplify everything. The poem @Joleneakamama shared emphasises the value of women and the considerations they must make prior to marriage. Those points it makes are valid. It cannot be expected to be complete nor completely balanced - it's art, not a theological treatise. It highlights only part of the whole, but that does not make the part it highlights invalid.
Click to expand...
You want to join the girl's team? We're recruiting :)
 
Posted here due to its relevance related to background arguments.

My only quibbles are:
  • all men, not just black men, are under the thumb of (mostly European) ruling-class men; and
  • he seems to be diminishing I Timothy as only being a 'Letter' and not fully Scripture.

I'm tellin' you -- you're going to find it difficult not to watch the entire 80 minutes!

[Thanks to @Bina for turning me on to this YouTube video.]
 
Can't find better thread that this.

There is long tradition of blaming social evils on girls talking unsupervised with boys. It all started with evil mailbox.

Screenshot_20240125-001323_Firefox.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top