Because objecting to your wife embracing her inner slut is cisgender, heteronormative Patriarchy(tm) or something …
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room, Loretta Lynn is on the stereo, and my wife is out on a date with a man named Paulo. It’s her second date this week; her fourth this month so far. If it goes like the others, she’ll come home in the middle of the night, crawl into bed beside me, and tell me all about how she and Paulo had sex. I won’t explode with anger or seethe with resentment. I’ll tell her it’s a hot story and I’m glad she had fun. It’s hot because she’s excited, and I’m glad because I’m a feminist.
Before my wife started sleeping with other men, I certainly considered myself a feminist, but I really only understood it in the abstract. When I quit working to stay at home with the kids, I began to understand it on a whole new level. I am an economically dependent househusband coping with the withering drudgery of child-rearing. Now that I understand the reality of that situation, I don’t blame women for demanding more for themselves than the life of the housewife. […]
She didn’t present it as an issue of feminism to me, but after much soul-searching about why the idea of my wife having sex with other men bothered me I came to a few conclusions: Monogamy meant I controlled her sexual expression, and, not to get all women’s-studies major about it, patriarchal oppression essentially boils down to a man’s fear that a woman with sexual agency is a woman he can’t control. We aren’t afraid of their intellect or their spirit or their ability to bear children. We are afraid that when it comes time for sex, they won’t choose us. This petty fear has led us as a culture to place judgments on the entire spectrum of female sexual expression: If a woman likes sex, she’s a whore and a slut; if she only likes sex with her husband or boyfriend, she’s boring and lame; if she doesn’t like sex at all, she’s frigid and unfeeling. Every option is a trap. […]
When my wife told me she wanted to open our marriage and take other lovers, she wasn’t rejecting me, she was embracing herself. When I understood that, I finally became a feminist.
This excruciating exercise in self-humiliating apologia is this is exactly what (and why) the whole rah-rah-polyamory married to contemporary female supremacy is doing to relationships.
Making them irrelevant.
No where in this man’s Chronicles of Cuckolding (thanks for reminding me of the right descriptive word, Ace) is any kind of realization of what he is going to do when his kids are old enough to realize that mom and dad are willing adulterers.
Because the kids will find out. There is no way to hide this. They will know mommy isn’t out with the Bowling League even if that’s where the balls are.
And does the writer Michael Sonmore want this kind of “marriage” for his kids when they are grown? Is he going to start teaching them that monogamy is on the wrong side of history and if you can’t be with the one you love, love the one you’re with?
Yes, we’ve never tried this Free Love thing before. And guess what?
Sex is never about just sex.
h/t David Thompson who adds:
I don’t think Mr Sonmore is quite making the persuasive case he presumably hopes for. Still, his children, aged six and three, must be thrilled by their parents’ progressive, self-embracing relationship, and delighted to hear that Mommy is out all night shagging strangers again.
the Loretta Lynn part rings false
Yep, because women acting like men and men acting like women is exactly the true path to equality. He made me want to barf.
that’s offensive she’s not acting like a man she’s acting like a whore
Tracy
when he says that monogamy is just the male’s way of controlling female sexual agency I want to go punch him in the mouth.
MEN and WOMEN who marry make an agreement about sexual exclusivity. You can either control yourself or not. If the latter, then don’t be married because you have the maturity of a 3 year old surrounded by junk food.
omg there’s a Dylan’s downtown and now they just opened a ghirardelli in the riggles
i give you chockit-dipped bacon
so easy and so so family friendly unlike this manhattan trash slut and her nutless concubine
If you cheat once, keep your mouth shut about it, or tell a therapist if you have to. If you find yourself cheating again and again, realize you are a pig who should not be married and stop being married.
That pathetic excuse for a man needs to be punched in the nose a few times.
…coping with the withering drudgery of child-rearing….
I guess this patsy really is a Feminist.
QUESTION: Where do you think his ‘Wife’ stores his balls?
Perhaps she ground them up along with her placenta and that’s what gives the roses in the garden their glow.
The delusion be strong with that one. Happyfeet: a man with a wife and mistress and a job bringing home the bacon to a tassle of kids was called a ‘stud’, a ‘man’s man’. And the wife that excused it was a pathetic waif. Change the names and genders around and the Feminists would be screaming at the inequality of it all – that the wife was delusional, that it wasn’t a family, it was a 2nd job for him and a housekeeper’s job for her.
Back in the day, in a ‘womans study course’ I took in college, I was asked, in class, what I thought of the ERA. I said it was stupid. I didn’t want ‘equal’ rights, I wanted the ‘same’ rights. I won. Apparently, the mass of idiot women think that means they can act like the men they despised, and the idiot men think that means they act like the women they despised.
Yes, you will all point and sneer, but the stupidity humans will cheerfully express as if they achieved some great understanding, makes me wish for ‘the great collapse’, the ‘great war’…..so we can clear out the deadwood.
yeah i didn’t grow up in stud land
i think of that more as a back-east moonstruck kinda place
in texas you be a man, you be a provider
it’s a big responsibility
this is texas feminisms with respect to “a man with a wife and mistress and a job bringing home the bacon to a tassle of kids was called a ‘stud’, a ‘man’s man’”
compare and contrast the whore in the linked article
it’s a striking contrast
man with a wife and mistress and a job bringing home the bacon to a tassle of kids was called a ‘stud’, a ‘man’s man’.
When was that, Tracy? A man with a wife and mistress was the one the boss mistrusted. Because if he would cheat on his wife, he’d cheat the company.
Or a boss that could find out if a man had a mistress could black mail him or get him fired.
THAT was the “good old days” where single men were looked at as immature and a married man loyal to his wife and kids was considered the gold standard for an employee.
It’s not a brave new world at all. It’s the same old world only people who say so get shouted down. Nuts and idiots get to put on their little show while pussies, wimps, and losers tiptoe around them.
cynical much?
president cuntstain has DATABASES
databases, i might add, what have the stamp of approval with respect to their disparate impacty goodness from no less an institution than Falmerica’s Supreme Whore Roberts Court
tell me again this isn’t a brave new world
is it a tax?
is it a floor wax?
failmerica lol
oopsers *Failmerica’s* Supreme Whore Roberts Court i mean
ONT had databases too. Now China has them. BEST O’ HANDS>
Darleen, I’m not calling it the ‘good ole days’. But Rudy G was considered a candidate despite moving his mistress into the gov’s mansion – now, not a candidate or even a good man by most of the people generally considered ‘conservative’. Still. You are right that most people, the people we’d like to be and have as friends, would not spend time or dime with such a ‘stud’. That doesn’t mean he didn’t exist…during the 50s, 60s, 70s, well into the 80s.
Mr. Pablo truly and blessedly used to heart him some Rudy
Rudy de-sucked New York, got the abandoned car hulks out of the no-go neighborhoods, and cut the murder rate. That’s his big legacy not having a mistress.
shit’s gittin real in central park
palaeomerus: it’s the results that matter?
and no rudy did NOT de-suck NY
they deserve 10,000 more 9/11’s, these ones
coward-ass anti-semitic shit-stained mafia-loving obamaslut can’t-pay-enough-taxes manhattan-trash illiterate union-loving cunts
they do not add value
i treat every visit to NY like my last
take some pics
stop in one more place before hitting the hotel
it’s so sad
geez tracy I thought we weren’t supposed to care about a politician private life
unless they are putting their dogs on the roof of their car, or so loved being an American they want to be known by their nickname “Bobby”
and of course, CEOs are not allowed to actually act Mormon in their private life even if they ARE Mormon.
shut up hamster
So we’ve gone from “when men do it they’re called studs” to “so only results matter?”
i make good comments i have no idea what u talkin about willis
Gawker what you gonna do with Hulkamania runs wild on YOU.
my last ny trip
i’m checked into a hotel right by the tower of the “freedom”
cause of i work with a company headquartered in old wtc #whatever
(and that old house is gonna be shakin’ –
rafter rockin’, foundation quakin’)
and etc
but anyways
they were RUDE
and then they saw what company i was with and were super super nauseatingly nice oh we’re sorry
and my feeling is
maybe you cunts need you some more 9/11
in the rest of failmerica, we’re still nice
nice from the git-go
you manhattan-trash cunts don’t get a hall pass
u just don’t
Darleen: I don’t think I ever said that or implied it. I think the private activities of a politician reflect how they might act as an office holder, so, yea, I consider it. I’m the one that judges people…remember! If a man will cheat on a solemn vow, he will cheat on an oath.
I know that I suggested that CEO’s that piss off people will have to suck it up if a mob starts screaming for their heads. I didn’t say they had to bow to said mob. And in the vein of Gallo, if a person speaks their mind, others have the liberty to ask for their head (resignation). No one has to listen to them.
I hope I have been consistent in this regard: I support the right to say, do anything that you wish as long as it doesn’t interfere in the liberty of others – I also support that you get to own the consequences of those words or actions.
I didn’t support Romney because I didn’t think he reflected any conservative values in politics. He certainly had the cleanest hands. I didn’t support McCain for the same reason. I didn’t vote for Obama….or any other Democrat EXCEPT my first Presidential vote….unfortunately it went to Carter. then a year later I joined the Air Force and watched that cluster……
Did I think Rudy needed to go to jail for adultery? Or his mistress? No. But I certainly wouldn’t give him the keys to the Oval Office, or MY apartment either.
palaeomerus: I wasn’t lamenting the loss of ‘studs’ or suggesting I thought they were great. You pointed out that some will remember Rudy for what he did in NY, in general and post 9/11. I also remember the mistress.
I’ve re-read my response and I will retract the implication that YOU were dismissing the mistress.
is a brave new whirl
suck it
next thing
we’re touching
So I take it we’re all now in agreement that Rudy Guiliani is in no way representative of the so-called good ol’ days?
>So I take it we’re all now in agreement that Rudy Guiliani is in no way representative of the so-called good ol’ days? <
you hate the squeegee trans gender goons?
>Did I think Rudy needed to go to jail for adultery? Or his mistress? No. But I certainly wouldn’t give him the keys to the Oval Office, or MY apartment either<
so says ms. lick.
When I think about me…
John Lydon – This is PiL, this is my culture
Land of my birth.
This is my cuntry.
Gran-dest on erf.
it’s Monday
I can’t get past the idea that this man (using the term loosely) referred to the raising of his children as “withering drudgery.” What are we becoming as a society when children are openly referred to this way? The left is “progressing” itself to death.
Walker signs abortion ban in Wisconsin
oh my goodness he’s such a strong decisive leader
somebody bake this man a casserole
anonamom: I wish it were so “progressing itself to death” but it is raising children…..who, maybe, as part of their youthful rebellion, would be conservative?
palaeomerus: it’s the results that matter?
Yes Tracy, they do. Case in point: None other than Billy Jeff Clinton!
After the Great Political Upchuck of 1994, Bill Clinton realized that his initial Far Left Approach wasn’t going to work.
He sacked the most leftist of his advisers (does anybody remember the radical Ms. Achtenberg, Mr. Cisneros, Ms. Elders, Mr. Reich, Ms. Shalala? All of whom had to leave under clouds of scandal and disgust) and Billy Jeff put in pragmatic types as replacements. Hillary Clinton was sent back to the kitchen to bake cookies.
In the end, although loathsome to many Conservatives on a personal level, Billy Jeff did a couple of downright Conservative acts: (1) welfare curtailment and reform, and (2) cutting the capital gains tax rates in half, from 28/20% short/long to 15/10%, fueling the investment boom of the mid to late 1990s. The Obamunists have undone both since then.
But Bill Clinton wasn’t all about Leftist Marxism. Bill Clinton was all about–Bill Clinton.
Contrast this to the Obamunist, who has *doubled down* in spite of two Congressional electoral drubbings.
Then again, perhaps he has realized that much of the the GOPee is all bluster and no spine…. :-(
Meanwhile, back on topic—this “family” is raising children! I pity those poor kids who have to grow up seeing this….
Cuckold-doodle-doo!
[…] Darleen Click: Brave New World […]
makes me wish for ‘the great collapse’, the ‘great war’…..so we can clear out the deadwood.
Southeast Asia hasn’t recovered from theirs; instead, all the institutions that used to keep people human were destroyed, and now parents sell their kids into sex slavery without thinking twice.
It could happen here, too.
a man with a wife and mistress and a job bringing home the bacon to a tassle of kids was called a ‘stud’, a ‘man’s man’.
When was that, Tracy?
Certainly not on Mad Men. And reporters totally ratted out JFK and his many affairs because they were Just That Intent on preserving the sanctity of marriage in the public attitude.
If a man will cheat on a solemn vow, he will cheat on an oath.
Thing is, men break marital vows because they figure they can get away with it, because they “have needs,” and it’s not hard to find other men who will agree with you that it’s no big. What she doesn’t know won’t hurt her, amirite?
Cheating in business or politics likewise happens when people feel like they can get away with it, because situational ethics or everybody’s doing it or ya gotta play the game or get played by it.
So if a man lives in a milieu where doing his secretary is no big but everyone’s watching to make sure his hand’s not in the till, he might be living a type of split honor.
Or not. I don’t run in those circles, so I couldn’t really say.
Why not go full Brave New World and have someone else raise your kids?
Why not go full Brave New World and have someone else raise your kids?
School breakfasts and lunches, even in the summer time?
Government sponsored day care?
I think we are already there!
the Loretta Lynn part rings false
He sure as heck isn’t listening to Tammy Wynette”s “Stand by Your Man”.
There’s also no reason to believe this article is genuine.
Double-sawbuck says a woman wrote it.
I am guessing it was written by either Al Bundy or Stanley Roper.
dicentra….the longer I think about it (and that is bad enough as it is), I wouldn’t take your bet. The Left has been known for faking stories.
“I support the right to say, do anything that you wish as long as it doesn’t interfere in the liberty of others” Tell that to the Kleins and Ryan Whites of the world.
“I also support that you get to own the consequences of those words or actions.” From your lips to God’s ear.
“Thing is, men break marital vows because they figure they can get away with it, because they “have needs,” and it’s not hard to find other men who will agree with you that it’s no big. What she doesn’t know won’t hurt her, amirite?” You might try asking one.
Gee Gulermo: you post that as if it is condemnation of me via my words. It isn’t. What does Ryan White have to do with it? As to the Kleins. Hey, they apparently knew it might be an issue and decided their course of action if it ever came up. Good for them. Principled stand. Had consequences, they took them.
I understand you (the Left can’t either) can’t stand the ‘other’ side using liberty for things you (they) find offensive. Liberty is messy.
But as to the man in the story? sniveling sack of ….
yeah i don’t get the Ryan White thing
>Gee Gulermo: you post that as if it is condemnation of me via my words. It isn’t. What does Ryan White have to do with it? As to the Kleins. Hey, they apparently knew it might be an issue and decided their course of action if it ever came up. Good for them. Principled stand. Had consequences, they took them. <
are you a soros/media matters troll or a rt troll?
>Walker signs abortion ban in Wisconsin<
i'd have made it 12 weeks. if women are too stupid to know they are pregnant take their "rights" to kill a baby away.
re: Ryan White. Who’s responsible for that? Eggs and omelets?
“I understand you” My only wish.
“Liberty is messy.” Libertine is spelled with a small “L”.
“yeah i don’t get the Ryan White thing” Of course you don’t. Try harder.
“Good for them. Principled stand. Had consequences” And they were rapidly punished for that expression of faith.
The soft Tyranny of your minority.
Who’s Ryan White?
Google shows me a hemophiliac who died from AIDS in the 1990s and a hockey player.
[…] Rule 5 and FMJRA Wombat: Mark Steyn’s Superbowl of Super Holes and Darleen Click’s Brave New World […]
I knew who he was, I just don’t see the relevance. Unless Gulermo wants me to feel some kind of responsibility for AIDs. Back in the 90s, there had not been a single case of AIDs among lesbians. It might have changed in the interim…. So, there’s that.
While I might be amoral, liberty is spelled with a capital l at the beginning of a sentence.
You know….there is nothing I can say with regard to the Kleins that isn’t considered hatred/fascism (no, no one has used the word)/or some variation of progressive bs. The Kleins made a principled stand. I think it was calling attention to their faith, but that is their choice. People didn’t like it, and objected both in the marketplace and using the available laws. Call it whatever you want, but it wasn’t stoning in the streets.
MY minority is 1-2% of the population. Well, my other ‘minority’ status is 52% of the population. Please attribute the tyranny to the appropriate grouping: Liberals, Leftists, Progressives, Democrats…etc.
At Breitbart we can see a photo with a woman holding a grandly pink big sign at a rally for Planned Parenthood with white lettering which reads “I stand with Planned Parenthood ® “. In the interest of troofs in advertizing, perhaps “stand” ought to read “vivisect”.
“Back in the 90s, there had not been a single case of AIDs among lesbians.”
Did you, do you support the agenda?
HPV, Chlamydia, genital warts, etc. all consequences of the behavior, (libertine, small l), intended or not. 14 million new cases a year of HPV alone, so you got that going for you.
Gulermo: Agenda? Which agenda? the ‘free love’ agenda of the heterosexual 60’s? No, generally I am a monogamous type, though I’ve had my flings (in between relationships, not during). Gay rights? I support ‘rights’. Every right you have, I have, every right I have, you have.
I am the person that claims choices have consequences. STDs were as rampant in the past as they are today, there was a time when they were death sentences and STILL you couldn’t get people to stop or protect themselves. So, choices have consequences.
So, as to agenda. I don’t stand for a ‘free for all’, or ‘anything goes’, or ‘whatever dude…’. For some reason you seem to think I lack self-respect, that I lack a principled foundation. One I consider objective. That would be incorrect.
Me?
I’m all about truth, justice and libertine!
(capital l)
A shiver and a *siiiiigh*
Gulermo’s point was that Ryan White was an innocent victim of other people interfering with his liberty (namely, right to life) by abusing their own.
Because, I can do whatever I want as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else is just bullshit where the rubber meets the road.
I can do whatever I want as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else is just bullshit where the rubber meets the road.
which is kind of the stuff I encounter each time I engage a Libertarian (big “L” deliberate) on the War on Drugs has failed because victimless meme.
Uh, no. Especially when hardworking regular folk are having their labor stolen by addicts getting all manner of “free gubmit stuff”.
In the example you cite, I think of the incredibly pissed of teenage girl who has to be mother to her two younger siblings because mom and dad are methheads who can’t take care of themselves, let alone their children.
And my example is in no way hypothetical. They live just up the street from me.
The truth is, we don’t belong to ourselves, we belong to the people who depend on us.
If you want to be a sovereign individual, buy a fucking island.