And I don't mean recently. I mean like she JUST showed up at the docks two minutes ago, looking at her watch, while the boat left port about 30 years ago, which matter of fact has probably been scrapped at the Bangladeshi boat yards.
There is also an element of "wanting my cake and eating it too" to her thinking (or perhaps, lack thereof.
So, once again, ergo I think it's time for another "Dating Stories of the Captain" so that we all may learn, ESPECIALLY women, and genuinely improve our lives (by avoiding the Captain's mistakes).
Long ago, your Captain was a naive, youthful, idealistic lieutenant. Though battle-hardened and having a few scars to evidence his experience, he was at the perfect balance of maturity and realism countered with a healthy amount of hope, optimism and a belief in the right kind of romance triggered by the right kind of girl.
He found her.
In a dance class of his. Cute as a button. Very smart. But more importantly, there was that chemistry that just doesn't come along that frequently (matter of fact, he hadn't ever experienced anything like up to that point in his life).
You would think that with such chemistry and the stars aligning, etc., that this would be an easy plane to land for the ole Captain. However, there was just one little problem. She was a STRINGENT Christian and I was an agnostic.
Understand, this was the only hiccup.
She was completely enamored with me, and I with her (as proof, look at the economics poem I wrote for her). However, for 6 months she fought every NATURAL, BIOLOGICAL drive and instinct she had to kiss me and go out with me, because of one passage from the bible that has ruined more potential happy couples than anything else - 2nd Corinthinians 6:14
"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?"
Translation? If he isn't a Christian, then you CANNOT date him (let alone marry the guy).
It was a sad situation. It was more than one conversation where she would break down crying as she could not reconcile St. Paul's words to the Corinthians with her natural, visceral attraction to me and my agnosticism. And try as I might to point out the idiocy of listening to a doctrine that has been translated over 2,000 years ago across 4 different languages (one of which is dead now) as well as the fact that "what if there's a chance, Christianity might not be the "100% correct religion," she would have no part of it. She had her check list. She was resolute. The Lord would provide.
Aside from this very large disagreement, there was only one other disagreement we had. It was nowhere near as major nor deal-breaking, but it did provide me some insight later on in life that explained to me what was really going on;
She found my version of sexuality, intimacy and romance revolting.
I, like any other red-blooded American male, had NO SHAME of admitting that it would be GRAND to come home from a hard day's work and there, unbeknownst to me was my wife/girlfriend/significant other in a French Maid outfit with a martini in one hand, a cigar in the other and Frank Sinatra playing in the background. Not every day of course, but to have a wife like that would be grand.
She found it not only revolting, but insulting.
"Why you would want your wife to degrade herself to such a level is beyond me. I find it to be more like slavery than anything else."
And thus like the author of the article, this girl completely missed the boat.
In the end I realized what was really happening. This girl wanted the best of BOTH worlds.
She wanted an alpha male, which explained her instinctive attraction to me (not to brag, but yeah, I'm pretty alpha). I didn't take crap. I spoke my mind. I would fight. I had passion. I did what I wanted. And I relented for no one and nothing. I supported myself and had never taken charity. I was a real man's man.
However, she also wanted the beta. The man who would collapse and say, "Paris is worth the mass." Who would deny his own beliefs and fake being a Christian. Who would submit to her, albeit intellectually dishonestly. And who would actually forfeit the life long American males' dream of a beautiful wife just simply dressing up all sexy and pampering him once in a while for what I presume would be a sex life solely for the purpose of making more Christians, not (heaven forbid!) for recreational purposes.
It is here that his love-ne'er-meant-to-be and the author of the article fail, and will continue to fail, because they do not understand one very simple rule about men;
Being alpha and being beta ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.
A man CANNOT be both alpha and beta.
You get one or the other.
Now I know some women would prefer one over the other. And naturally you would like some elements of both. BUT YOU CAN ONLY CHOOSE ONE.
The nature of an alpha male is to be the leader. THis is the NATURAL STATE or at least INCLINATION or biological PREDISPOSITION FOR MEN. They are "MEN." They are MANLY. They will go and do manly things and have manly preferences. It is natural and biological and it is NOT OPTIONAL. Boys will be boys, no we don't need no freaking Ritalin. This is normal.
Then there are the beta men. They go against their nature because they think it will some how bring them an advantage. THis is certainly true. Patience, compromising, avoiding conflict are all life-increasing acts in threatening environments. But do not expect them to hold to principle, hold their ground or be MANLY because that results in conflict or a threat. And it doesn't even have to be a life-threatening conflict. Just conflict in general because they almost seem to prefer peace and agreement over their own inner desires. They will constantly ask you for your approval. They will constantly get permission first. They will not be the manly, rugged Steve McQueen character you all want to whisk you away on your motorcycle against your parents' wishes. They will be like Al Gore or Woody Alan.
The larger point is simply this ladies. You do not get your checklist because, frankly, no man in the 3 billion men on the planet meet it. Not because each trait unto itself is outlandish to expect or so rare, but a lot of them ARE mutually exclusive. What you have to ask yourself is do you want an alpha male (like a Ferrari, powerful, but expensive and fuel inefficient) or a beta male (like a PRius, high quality, good gas mileage, reliable, but no power). Because while you can't have the "perfect man," you CAN have a GOOD man (whether he's a beta or an alpha). ie- a good Chevy is better than the non-existent 700 HP V-12 Ferrari that gets 95 MPG with George Clooney in the passenger seat. Besides, last I checked the girl of long ago is still waiting for the strong alpha male, who is yet beta enough to abide by all of her requests. Apparently the Lord is not providing.
ht to the notifiers of this article.
9 comments:
Dude, you sound like a whiner.
FWIW, Ideology should be a deal breaker. She, most likely, would want children, and would want them with a man who would be in agreement with how they are raised, such as attending church every Sunday (not just Christmas/Easter), praying as a family, etc.
So, I can see where she's coming from.
How do you get count 4 languages for Corinthians? Should be Greek/Latin to English (maybe you're counting Henry VIII's version of English to King James'?) Minor point I know, but you got me wondering.
Anyhow, speaking from the perspective of parents who were of different religions (Mormon Dad, Quaker Mom -- eventually Quaker won out) I can sympathize with you on this... But I wonder if her reaction to your maid suggestion wasn't more something of a signal that she wanted you to know she wasn't slutty; IE she thought you were giving her a shit test (to coin a phrase from Roissy) she thought she was supposed to respond in the least slutty way to?
Good for her. She's holding to what's most important. This country would be a lot better off if more women noted that certain things are deal-breakers.
Hebrew and Latin were the other two.
OK, Cap'n, I'm going to have to correct you on this one; all modern translations of the New Testament--including the KJV--are from the original Greek, in which Paul (a native of Tarsus) wrote. There are no intermediate steps.
The young lady has been sadly misled regarding that particular scripture. She has probably also been taught that Onanism has something to do with masturbation ( it doesn't ) and that Jesus defended the adulteress from stoning ( he didn't ).
I agree with your post. Sanctimonious religious women are quite schizophrenic and unrealistic, even for alpha religious men. Churches have been feminized and promote the beta as the ideal man. Nothing is mentioned that would hurt the feelings of these "good" Christian women.
Therefore you will find very few Alpha men in church. Also the marriages are not all that strong (regardless of what everyone wants to believe and pretend). The beta Christian males don’t trigger her "tingles," so the wives are unhappy and gripe all the more about "nature of male failings."
I'm very late to this discussion Captian, but I have mixed eelings about your post. On the one hand, I think this girl was absolutely right not to take up with a guy who doesn't share her most sacred beliefs. That would be a terrible idea and a violation of her conscience.
On the other hand, I disagree with her when she says thata wife who caters to her husband is somehow demeaning herself. I have never been able to understand how women (particularly Christian women) reach that conclusion.
As for the whole alpha/beta thing: it's kind of old, and I say that as a woman married to man of high integrity who says what he wants (and expects me to comply), and does what he wants so long as it doesn't violate the tenets of his faith.
His position with me is basically this: Don't ask me to change something about myself that isn't clearly a moral issue because I'm not doing it. I was like this when you married me and if I change this thing, next year you'll be asking me to change something else. And I'm not doing it.
A man can be a Christian and be a "real" man. I actually find his contrarian ways attractive and in no way at odds with his Christian faith.
Christianity doesn't demand that men become weak. Churches populated by clergy infected with feminism demands that men become wek and call it Christianity.
You're a heathen upset that Christianity is actually powerful enough to keep someone (in this case a woman) from bowing to your lack of morality. You've labeled your deficient morality "Alpha-ness." There are plenty of Alpha men who are Christians and perhaps one day this young woman will be waiting at home for one of them when he comes home from work, in some more mature sexual fantasy pose than smoking cigars and dressing up in the way you have prescribed. Some man you will doubtlessly term a beta will have her, and in reality he will be much much more Alpha than you, but he will know how to bow His knee to a God that is greater than you, not because he is fake but because he is actually a real alpha and recognizes the Great Alpha in a way you do not.
Post a Comment