Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: Croix de Fer on June 22, 2018, 08:52:06 PM
-
Solely being a Catholic woman doesn't give you title to a good, Catholic man for a husband. Since a good, holy, Catholic woman is extremely rare in our society, don't think you can be lukewarm, at best, in your spirituality, and you can neglect your health and appearance, and your personality & cognitive domain can, variably, be a byproduct of this modern world, and all of this suffices in attaining a good, Catholic man, because his selection is extremely sparse. Shed yourself from your sense of entitlement. Shed yourself from your feminism and modernism. Shed yourself from your premeditation, conniving, selfishness, harlotry, and manipulative ways. Shed yourself of your physical lethargy and lack of concern for your health. Shed yourself from your narcissism. Shed yourself from your contentiousness.
You must be virtuous and chaste. Adhere to the natural order of man and woman. You must have modesty, while having reasonable concern for your health and appearance. An inner beauty still emanates through the most physically vapid woman, thus, evoking an attraction from Godly men, if the woman isn't a neglectful, physical blob or a freak with cartoonish physical traits resulting from her own modern lifestyle & wretched personality that make her appear she should be standing out in the middle of a cornfield to scare the crows away.
Love, serve & seek to please Jesus Christ and Blessed Mary above all. Don't rationalize your behavior or endeavors that are worldly.
-
Croix. It sounds like you are angry and hurt. Not all women are modernist gold diggers. I do notice that traditional Catholicism attracts some users and whores. I have had some tramps hit on my husband at Church socials.
N
-
Croix. It sounds like you are angry and hurt.
Not hurt. Angry, yes, which I try to confine to a righteous anger, but I fall short a lot.
I'm here to chew bubble gum and destroy female privilege and the hypnosis they put over weak men...
.....AND I'M ALL OUT OF BUBBLE GUM.
-
Croix. It sounds like you are angry and hurt.
He's probably just all jacked up on sugar and white rice. He'll crash down from there shortly.
:laugh1:
-
I do notice that traditional Catholicism attracts some users and whores.
You'll find those everywhere ... they're not unique to traditional Catholicism by any means. For some reason, however, traditional Catholicism does seem to attract a disproportionate number of gαy men, who appear to be taken with the aesthetics of the Traditional liturgy.
-
He's probably just all jacked up on sugar and white rice. He'll crash down from there shortly.
:laugh1:
:laugh2:
-
Your behavior on the other thread, your promotion of non-Catholic male gender role "pundits," and your official position discouraging marriage exclude you from giving any advice.
In fact, I think you are suffering from a diagnosable mental illness: narcissistic personality disorder.
-
Your behavior on the other thread, your promotion of non-Catholic male gender role "pundits," and your official position discouraging marriage exclude you from giving any advice.
In fact, I think you are suffering from a diagnosable mental illness: narcissistic personality disorder.
Smelly Butler, you're a soy boy and simp
-
Croix. It sounds like you are angry and hurt. Not all women are modernist gold diggers. I do notice that traditional Catholicism attracts some users and whores. I have had some tramps hit on my husband at Church socials.
https://youtu.be/9pdpLAn8mh4
-
To anyone opposing or doubting a prenuptial agreement or MGTOW, listen to this lady's talk about men, women and the court system:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faeT4fIFAcg
-
Solely being a Catholic woman doesn't give you title to a good, Catholic man for a husband. Since a good, holy, Catholic woman is extremely rare in our society, don't think you can be lukewarm, at best, in your spirituality, and you can neglect your health and appearance, and your personality & cognitive domain can, variably, be a byproduct of this modern world, and all of this suffices in attaining a good, Catholic man, because his selection is extremely sparse. Shed yourself from your sense of entitlement. Shed yourself from your feminism and modernism. Shed yourself from your premeditation, conniving, selfishness, harlotry, and manipulative ways. Shed yourself of your physical lethargy and lack of concern for your health. Shed yourself from your narcissism. Shed yourself from your contentiousness.
You must be virtuous and chaste. Adhere to the natural order of man and woman. You must have modesty, while having reasonable concern for your health and appearance. An inner beauty still emanates through the most physically vapid woman, thus, evoking an attraction from Godly men, if the woman isn't a neglectful, physical blob or a freak with cartoonish physical traits resulting from her own modern lifestyle & wretched personality that make her appear she should be standing out in the middle of a cornfield to scare the crows away.
Love, serve & seek to please Jesus Christ and Blessed Mary above all. Don't rationalize your behavior or endeavors that are worldly.
There isn't really anything wrong with this advice, although there is some question as to the poster's right/authority to be saying it. Similarly, I have watched a few of the videos Croix has posted and mainly agreed with the points made.
I hate feminism and have a lot of sympathy for the problems facing men. My normal inclination would be to be an ally for Croix's position, but I have been put off by his harshness and hostility toward women in general. I just can't see him being very effective at persuading any woman to improve her behaviour.
I question whether that is even his goal. He seems more interested in venting anger than working for constructive changes.
-
There isn't really anything wrong with this advice, although there is some question as to the poster's right/authority to be saying it. Similarly, I have watched a few of the videos Croix has posted and mainly agreed with the points made.
I hate feminism and have a lot of sympathy for the problems facing men. My normal inclination would be to be an ally for Croix's position, but I have been put off by his harshness and hostility toward women in general. I just can't see him being very effective at persuading any woman to improve her behaviour.
I question whether that is even his goal. He seems more interested in venting anger than working for constructive changes.
I agree with you. I dislike feminism as well and we all deal with it every day. I also deal with pansy men but we don't have to constantly denigrate each gender. Sheesh.
-
To anyone opposing or doubting a prenuptial agreement or MGTOW, listen to this lady's talk about men, women and the court system:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faeT4fIFAcg
.
If this what you call a lady, no wonder you have problems.
-
.
If this what you call a lady, no wonder you have problems.
Logical fallacy. Not a counter argument. Instantaneous fail. :laugh1:
-
To anyone opposing or doubting a prenuptial agreement or MGTOW, listen to this lady's talk about men, women and the court system:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faeT4fIFAcg
I couldn't work out the gender by looking at the image, but if you say so, it is probably a female, but doesn't appear to be a lady, while wearing a butch hairdo and a man's singlet.
-
I couldn't work out the gender by looking at the image, but if you say so, it is probably a female, but doesn't appear to be a lady, while wearing a butch hairdo and a man's singlet.
Hear what she says and counter it.
Stop with the ad hominem fallacy.
-
I didn't make it past the first example because it has no bearing on Trad marriages. Trad women generally don't have incomes and if they do it's supplemental. Point me toward where she discusses a situation that applies.
-
Hear what she says and counter it.
Stop with the ad hominem fallacy.
She is basically giving a defense of MGTOW. She describes various ways in which the system is unfair to men to show that it reasonable for them to avoid marriage. She is saying that it is not irresponsible, as Jordan Peterson claims. I do not recall anything in defense of prenups.
I agree with her that you should not get married.
-
She is basically giving a defense of MGTOW. She describes various ways in which the system is unfair to men to show that it reasonable for them to avoid marriage. She is saying that it is not irresponsible, as Jordan Peterson claims. I do not recall anything in defense of prenups.
I agree with her that you should not get married.
But some of the anecdotes that she gives is reason to get a prenup, if the man is considering marriage.
-
At the end of the day, it's your choice to marry the woman. If you can't trust her enough not to be scheming to rip you off, then you shouldn't marry her in the first place. As for child support and alimony in the event that something unforeseen arises, you owe that to them anyway before God.
-
Ladislaus says:
At the end of the day, it's your choice to marry the woman. If you can't trust her enough not to be scheming to rip you off, then you shouldn't marry her in the first place.
If she can't trust the man's lead to get a prenup, then the man most definitely shouldn't marry her. She has bad intentions. At the very least, she will be disobedient. Litmus Test failed.
Ladislaus says:
As for child support and alimony in the event that something unforeseen arises, you owe that to them anyway before God.
You must shed yourself from the indoctrination. Your err in the default thinking that children should automatically go to the wife.
The prenup should include the man keeping the children, if he isn't provably guilty of putting them in any kind of danger.
-
..
I highly recommend this video by Fr. Ripperger.
It's excellent for anyone who is currently distracted from the Catholic meaning of what a man is.
The Latin word for man is vir.
It's no small coincidence that vir is the root word of virtue.
What does it mean when a man has virtue, or is virtuous? It means he has attributes of a real man.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7V1W967ofA
.
To the modern ear, some of the things Fr. has to say here are shocking.
For example, how often have you heard reference to a promiscuous man implied as manly because of his "conquests?"
Fr. explains why a man who seeks multiple women for serving his pleasure is not manly at all, but effeminate!
.
-
But some of the anecdotes that she gives is reason to get a prenup, if the man is considering marriage.
No, they are reasons to not marry at all. You seem to think that a prenup will make it possible to marry while escaping the evil system. You want to have your cake and eat it too.
Given your view of marriage and of women, you should not be considering marriage. A prenup is not going to make you capable of marriage.
-
.
Any man who is starting to think that a prenuptial agreement might somehow solve any problem ought to study what Fr. Ripperger has to say in the video above and in other videos he has made over the years. There are a number of them.
.
-
No, they are reasons to not marry at all. You seem to think that a prenup will make it possible to marry while escaping the evil system. You want to have your cake and eat it too.
Given your view of marriage and of women, you should not be considering marriage. A prenup is not going to make you capable of marriage.
Another dumb, subjective opinion that's not a real argument. You're now trying to steer the subject to what I, personally, should or should not do, because you've lost the argument.
You can't counter the fact that a man should marry a woman who is willing to get a prenup, thereby he is protected from the courts & her at a later time, if she divorced him for reasons that go against the legal text of the prenup. In other words, she can't take his money, house, etc. If she agrees to it, and he asks her to get married, and they marry, it's a win-win situation. That is true love. She truly loves him by her obedience to get a prenup, and she shows no premeditative ill-will, and he obviously loves her, for he wouldn't have asked her to marry him.
-
.
Any man who is starting to think that a prenuptial agreement might somehow solve any problem ought to study what Fr. Ripperger has to say in the video above and in other videos he has made over the years. There are a number of them.
.
There are many seemingly "masculine" men in the surface who are quite effeminate in reality, such as the average victimized MGTOW. One of the most evident characteristics of the effeminate man is the total aversion to anything which requires sacrifice and suffering. Effeminate men tend to flee from anything that is not pleasurable. They also do not take risks. True masculine men are as scarce as true feminine women nowadays.
This article (https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/Effeminacy manifests as, in no particular order: A pathological refusal to deal with objective reality (intense normalcy bias, self-delusion) Hatred of exertion An intense aversion to helping others (because helping almost always involves exertion) The refusal to voluntarily take on ANY hardship, discomfort, or… wait for it… SUFFERING Lashing out at virile people as a defense mechanism Need for human respect Hypersensitivity, easily “triggered”, often in “pissy moods” Intense judgmentalism and hyper-criticality Inordinate attachment to money – tightfistedness, stinginess Intense selfishness and self-absorption Sense of entitlement, especially to other peoples’ money Narcissism, both grandiose and vulnerable Incessant bitching, criticizing and complaining while refusing to act or charitably instruct others Shunning personal responsibility, most especially taking responsibility for the actions of others or for no-fault accidents Perpetual victimhood, oftentimes due to premeditated self-sabotage Reducing Christianity to the merely theoretical, confined exclusively to the domain of ideas, utterly divorced from concrete action Liturgical fetishism, “empty eggshell” Catholicism) has a list of how the vice of effeminacy manifest itself in men:
* A pathological refusal to deal with objective reality (intense normalcy bias, self-delusion)
* Hatred of exertion
* An intense aversion to helping others (because helping almost always involves exertion)
* The refusal to voluntarily take on ANY hardship, discomfort, or… wait for it… SUFFERING
* Lashing out at virile people as a defense mechanism
* Need for human respect
* Hypersensitivity, easily “triggered”, often in “pissy moods”
* Intense judgmentalism and hyper-criticality
* Inordinate attachment to money – tightfistedness, stinginess
* Intense selfishness and self-absorption
* Sense of entitlement, especially to other peoples’ money
* Narcissism, both grandiose and vulnerable
* Incessant bitching, criticizing and complaining while refusing to act or charitably instruct others
* Shunning personal responsibility, most especially taking responsibility for the actions of others or for no-fault accidents
* Perpetual victimhood, oftentimes due to premeditated self-sabotage
* Reducing Christianity to the merely theoretical, confined exclusively to the domain of ideas, utterly divorced from concrete action
* Liturgical fetishism, “empty eggshell” Catholicism
" If we look at St. Thomas’ words in the Summa in Article 1 of Question 138 of the Second Part of the Second Part, we see that at the core of the vice of effeminacy is a pathological aversion to a lack of pleasure, that is to say, an aversion to anything even remotely unpleasant, most especially any sort of exertion (work) or voluntary suffering".
-
I agree with her that you should not get married.
:jester:
-
:jester:I agree with her that you should not get married.
It definitely wouldn't be to a pig like you. :laugh1:
And why are you stalking me on CathInfo?
-
The prenup should include the man keeping the children, if he isn't provably guilty of putting them in any kind of danger.
.
Divorce is a no-no. Annulments are legitimate as the Church stipulates. This, however, does not free either spouse from their obligations to their children: the father as provider, the mother as nurterer. Hence the prudence behind the mothers being awarded the children and the fathers providing child support.
.
-
And why are you stalking me on CathInfo?
.
I must hate my husband and secretly have a thing for you. :barf:
.
https://youtu.be/9pdpLAn8mh4
-
I know.
It's obvious your husband is a punk. You know it. This is why you spend so much time away from him and you stalk me on CathInfo.
.
You need professional help, Pablo.
-
Solely being a Catholic woman doesn't give you title to a good, Catholic man for a husband. Since a good, holy, Catholic woman is extremely rare in our society, don't think you can be lukewarm, at best, in your spirituality, and you can neglect your health and appearance, and your personality & cognitive domain can, variably, be a byproduct of this modern world, and all of this suffices in attaining a good, Catholic man, because his selection is extremely sparse. Shed yourself from your sense of entitlement. Shed yourself from your feminism and modernism. Shed yourself from your premeditation, conniving, selfishness, harlotry, and manipulative ways. Shed yourself of your physical lethargy and lack of concern for your health. Shed yourself from your narcissism. Shed yourself from your contentiousness.
You must be virtuous and chaste. Adhere to the natural order of man and woman. You must have modesty, while having reasonable concern for your health and appearance. An inner beauty still emanates through the most physically vapid woman, thus, evoking an attraction from Godly men, if the woman isn't a neglectful, physical blob or a freak with cartoonish physical traits resulting from her own modern lifestyle & wretched personality that make her appear she should be standing out in the middle of a cornfield to scare the crows away.
Love, serve & seek to please Jesus Christ and Blessed Mary above all. Don't rationalize your behavior or endeavors that are worldly.
Solely being a Catholic man doesn't give you title to a good, Catholic woman for a wife. Since a good, holy, Catholic man is extremely rare in our society, don't think you can be lukewarm, at best, in your spirituality, and you can neglect your health and appearance, and your personality & cognitive domain can, variably, be a byproduct of this modern world, and all of this suffices in attaining a good, Catholic woman, because her selection is extremely sparse. Shed yourself from your sense of entitlement. Shed yourself from your misogyny and modernism. Shed yourself from your premeditation, conniving, selfishness, harlotry, and manipulative ways. Shed yourself of your physical lethargy and lack of concern for your health. Shed yourself from your narcissism. Shed yourself from your contentiousness.
You must be virtuous and chaste. Adhere to the natural order of man and woman. You must have modesty, while having reasonable concern for your health and appearance. An inner beauty still emanates through the most physically vapid man, thus, evoking an attraction from Godly women, if the man isn't a neglectful, physical blob or a freak with cartoonish physical traits resulting from his own modern lifestyle & wretched personality that make him appear he should be standing out in the middle of a cornfield to scare the crows away.
Love, serve & seek to please Jesus Christ and Blessed Mary above all. Don't rationalize your behavior or endeavors that are worldly.
-
.
You need professional help, Pablo.
Oops fat thumb. Intended to give thumbs up!
-
I think that, ideally, we would have older men giving younger men exhortations on how to be more godly men and older women giving younger women exhortations on how to be more godly women.
It is rarely effective to lecture the opposite sex (unless one is a priest or catechist or a similar position) because it sounds too much like complaining about them. It seems especially bad for women to lecture at men because it comes across as a woman taking a position of authority over men.
-
I think that, ideally, we would have older men giving younger men exhortations on how to be more godly men and older women giving younger women exhortations on how to be more godly women.
It is rarely effective to lecture the opposite sex (unless one is a priest or catechist or a similar position) because it sounds too much like complaining about them. It seems especially bad for women to lecture at men because it comes across as a woman taking a position of authority over men.
I agree with you that "It is rarely effective to lecture the opposite sex (unless one is a priest or catechist or a similar position) because it sounds too much like complaining about them." Where you lose me however, is your statement that " It seems especially bad for women to lecture at men because it comes across as a woman taking a position of authority over men."
Let us be clear. When Christ is at the center of a Catholic marriage, the husband has authority over his wife. However that does not mean that men in general have authority over all women. Just as it would be wrong for a random woman to lecture men in general, so also it is wrong for a random man to lecture women in general. Such a man would have absolutely no authority over women.
Even worse would be a poor injured man, possibly injured by a woman, spewing hatred at women -- irrationally generalizing that all women are like the one person who hurt him. Charity.
-
I agree with you that "It is rarely effective to lecture the opposite sex (unless one is a priest or catechist or a similar position) because it sounds too much like complaining about them." Where you lose me however, is your statement that " It seems especially bad for women to lecture at men because it comes across as a woman taking a position of authority over men."
Let us be clear. When Christ is at the center of a Catholic marriage, the husband has authority over his wife. However that does not mean that men in general have authority over all women. Just as it would be wrong for a random woman to lecture men in general, so also it is wrong for a random man to lecture women in general. Such a man would have absolutely no authority over women.
While it might not be ideal for a random man to lecture women in general (for example, in the context of a forum like this) it is not wrong in the same way it would be if the positions were reversed. A man lecturing women might be doing something inappropriate but a woman lecturing men is going against Scripture.
[11] (http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=61&ch=2&l=11-#x) Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. [12] (http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=61&ch=2&l=12-#x) But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence. (I Tim2)
-
While it might not be ideal for a random man to lecture women in general (for example, in the context of a forum like this) it is not wrong in the same way it would be if the positions were reversed. A man lecturing women might be doing something inappropriate but a woman lecturing men is going against Scripture.
Exactly.
-
While it might not be ideal for a random man to lecture women in general (for example, in the context of a forum like this) it is not wrong in the same way it would be if the positions were reversed. A man lecturing women might be doing something inappropriate but a woman lecturing men is going against Scripture.
[11] (http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=61&ch=2&l=11-#x) Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. [12] (http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=61&ch=2&l=12-#x) But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence. (I Tim2)
Standing up against a bully is well within appropriate behavior for a Catholic woman. It is not preaching or teaching.
-
Standing up against a bully is well within appropriate behavior for a Catholic woman. It is not preaching or teaching.
Perhaps some of Croix de Fer's posts might be characterized as bullying, but in this thread he gave us an exhortation to be godly Catholic women. Telling women that we should be virtuous and chaste is not bullying and does not need people "standing up against" it.
Disagree with him when he says something worth disagreeing with, but don't make it into a personal vendetta where everything he says comes under attack.
-
There isn't really anything wrong with this advice, although there is some question as to the poster's right/authority to be saying it.
And a question of to whom he's even addressing the remarks. I guess it's directed towards a generic Catholic woman who is lukewarm, doesn't care about her appearance, and yet feels entitled to a good Catholic husband? I guess that they know who they are? Otherwise, it's just a thinly-veiled rant against women in general ... or at the very least comes across that way to women.
-
You must shed yourself from the indoctrination. Your err in the default thinking that children should automatically go to the wife.
I never said that they SHOULD automatically go to the wife. I'm simply reacting the fact that they inevitably do in the modern court system (unless the wife is a criminal or drug addict or something along those lines). And prenups cannot predetermine custody of the children if during the time of divorce the wife were to make a case to the judge that it's in the CHILDREN'S best interest to stay with the wife. Children are not bound by the terms of a prenup contract.
-
Standing up against a bully is well within appropriate behavior for a Catholic woman. It is not preaching or teaching.
You're ignorant of the facts, and you expect female privilege. The fact is TxTradStalker, et al, initiated their attacks against me, and I only responded to her and them. In fact, on a different thread before these recent "Dowell threads", TxStalker went out of her way to render a passive-aggressive attack against me to try to stir things up, and I ignored it.
-
And a question of to whom he's even addressing the remarks. I guess it's directed towards a generic Catholic woman who is lukewarm, doesn't care about her appearance, and yet feels entitled to a good Catholic husband? I guess that they know who they are? Otherwise, it's just a thinly-veiled rant against women in general.
He was talking about the problem of women having a sense of entitlement. This is common enough that I do not see any problem with making it the subject of a "rant".
-
You're ignorant of the facts, and you expect female privilege. The fact is TxTradStalker, et al, initiated their attacks against me, and I only responded to her and them. In fact, on a different thread before these recent "Dowell threads", TxStalker went out of her way to render a passive-aggressive attack against me to try to stir things up.
You seem to care a little bit too much about personal attacks. Part of being a strong man is speaking the truth while not caring about what people think of you as a consequence.
-
You seem to care a little bit too much about personal attacks. Part of being a strong man is speaking the truth while not caring about what people think of you as a consequence.
Another inversion of reality. Not one time did I mention personal attacks against me until AFTER Matthew told me to stop with my remarks about TxTradStalker. I only mentioned the attacks against me to plead my case that I was initiated against, and I'm only reacting...
-
He was talking about the problem of women having a sense of entitlement. This is common enough that I do not see any problem with making it the subject of a "rant".
Without a specific target for the rant, it comes across as a generic statement along the lines of: "Catholic women feel that they're entitled to a Catholic man despite ..." These are the types of sentiments that you find on secular forums where there's much ranting against women because inferior women, they claim, all feel entitled to super ("alpha") men. They post examples of dating-site posts from unwed mothers who are unattractive, overweight, and have very little else going for them who have a long list of demands for what they require in a man (good-looking, fit, athletic, devoted/loyal, wealthy etc.).
But this rant misses the mark because the types of women who have this attitude (even among Catholics) rarely are looking for the "good Catholic man" ... but rather, the hot guy with a great personality ... who also makes tons of money. Generally speaking, women who are sincerely looking for good Catholic husbands do not have this arrogant sense of entitlement. That's why I feel that this misses the mark.
Of course, Croix had informed all of us that he's very attractive to women, so he must have more problems sifting out the good from the bad than the rest of us mere mortals. And I'm not just writing this as a slam on Croix, but am being serious. That's like the extremely rich guy who might have a hard time determining whether a woman really loves him and finds him attractive ... or, rather, has fallen in love with this wallet. Maybe that's why Croix's comments don't resonate with most of us. If I had been extremely wealthy when looking for a wife, I probably would have found a way to hide my wealth until the relationship with a woman became very serious. But one can't hide good look as easily (unless you're St. Rose of Lima).
-
Without a specific target for the rant, it comes across as a generic statement along the lines of: "Catholic women feel that they're entitled to a Catholic man despite ..." These are the types of sentiments that you find on secular forums where there's much ranting against women because inferior women, they claim, all feel entitled to super ("alpha") men. They post examples of dating-site posts from unwed mothers who are unattractive, overweight, and have very little else going for them who have a long list of demands for what they require in a man (good-looking, fit, athletic, devoted/loyal, wealthy etc.).
But this rant misses the mark because the types of women who have this attitude (even among Catholics) rarely are looking for the "good Catholic man" ... but rather, the hot guy with a great personality ... who also makes tons of money. Generally speaking, women who are sincerely looking for good Catholic husbands do not have this arrogant sense of entitlement. That's why I feel that this misses the mark.
I imagine that trad women don't have a sense of entitlement to the same degree that secular women do, but I suspect that, like feminism, it nevertheless affects us to some extent.
-
Generally speaking, women who are sincerely looking for good Catholic husbands do not have this arrogant sense of entitlement. That's why I feel that this misses the mark.
Even the ones that don't have a sense of entitlement but they still fit the the rest of the aforementioned disposition, if they can't find a good, Catholic man for a husband, they're largely to blame for it (unless it's God's Providence that they don't get married). The point is what good Catholic man would want to be with a woman fitting that disposition, even absent the sense of entitlement? You can't blame the man for not wanting to be with such a woman for the remainder of his days.
-
I imagine that trad women don't have a sense of entitlement to the same degree that secular women do, but I suspect that, like feminism, it nevertheless affects us to some extent.
I don't know. Any decent Catholic understands that we're entitled to nothing, but that everything we receive is a free undeserved gift from God.
-
Even the ones that don't have a sense of entitlement but they still fit the the rest of the aforementioned disposition, if they can't find a good, Catholic man for a husband, they're largely to blame for it (unless it's God's Providence that they don't get married). The point is what good Catholic man would want to be with a woman fitting that disposition, even absent the sense of entitlement? You can't blame the man for not wanting to be with such a woman for the remainder of his days.
And, I will add that I suspect the backlash I received from many - not all - but many of the women on these "Dowell threads", and similar threads, are from women who feel that they, deep down, identify to some degree with the women described in the "Hear, Woman !" original post. They have low self-esteem issues.
-
And, I will add that I suspect the backlash I received from many - not all - but many of the women on these "Dowell threads", and similar threads, are from women who feel that they, deep down, identify to some degree with the women described in the "Hear, Woman !" original post. They have low self-esteem issues.
Or it could just be your delivery.....
-
Perhaps some of Croix de Fer's posts might be characterized as bullying
Croix de Fer has been banned (https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/croix-de-fer-has-been-banned/msg617691/#msg617691)
« on: Today at 10:47:12 AM »
- Quote (https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/croix-de-fer-has-been-banned/?action=post;quote=617691;last_msg=617753)
- (https://www.cathinfo.com/Themes/default/images/up.gif)7 (https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/croix-de-fer-has-been-banned/?action=modifykarma;sa=applaud;uid=4;m=617691;e54b96c9059=d807abe2721339d371cc942a1269e6c1)
- (https://www.cathinfo.com/Themes/default/images/down.gif)0 (https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/croix-de-fer-has-been-banned/?action=modifykarma;sa=smite;uid=4;m=617691;e54b96c9059=d807abe2721339d371cc942a1269e6c1)
I don't have time for this ____.
Bishop Williamson is having a 30th Consecration anniversary in 2 days, and I'm planning to be there. And no, it's not anywhere near Texas. So I have some things to do yet (packing!)
So I don't have time for a flurry of mod reports every morning. Especially now! And even after I get back and settle in, I have to look for a new job. So even next week I won't have time to delete dozens of posts per week because Croix de Fer called someone "brothel tenant", "whore", "stalker", "cow", and many other foul names here on this fine Catholic forum. He's just not worth it.
Croix de Fer jumped the shark, and that's all there is to it. He used to have about 100 downvotes or less (vs. 2000 upvotes) -- and that was last month! But now he has more downvotes than upvotes! If that isn't "jumping the shark", I don't know what is. What happened to the guy? Pray for him.