The Dreaded “List” Again

Rollo Tomassi left the following link at Sunshine Mary’s blog so that she could use it as source material for a post, but since she is busy right now I decided to snag it for my own use: The Husband List: 12 Non-Negotiables. The website itself is a real piece of work, one of the most puffed up examples of Princess syndrome (of the EAP variety) run amok that I have ever seen. A sample:

Every woman you meet may seem one way at first. But as you peel the layers by taking the time to talk with her, you realize she is much more than meets the eye. One by one, she is discovered to be more than enough. She has been uniquely gifted in order to carry out a purpose. Her value is rare and precious. The problem is, there is an epidemic of women who do not believe in themselves. Due to the exposure of various negative forces, young women are selling out and settling every day. They have bought into the lie that they are not worthy of a joyous, peaceful and bold life.

Part of me wants to believe that this is a parody site, because it seems too good to be true. I mean, it almost reads like something that Deti would write. Alas, this is no parody. Women really do believe such nonsense, and peddle it all the same. Surprisingly, the “husband list” itself is not nearly so bad. In fact, much of it is quite good. I will reprint it below, with some editing (mostly of scripture) for brevity’s sake:

1. He is a practicing believer.
Issues and conflict are bound to rise in marriage, so it is crucial that there is a common foundation on which to hold the marriage accountable. The last thing you want to be fighting about is your faith, whether or not to pray and your viewpoints on religion. Believe me, I’ve been there before. It is exhausting.

2. God is the center of his life.
He seeks God’s wisdom in all the decisions he makes.

3. He has integrity and does not put himself in tempting situations.
He guards you against harm and protects the relationship.

4. Seeks mentorship and counsel.
It is important that your man is wise in realizing he can’t carry the weight of the world on his shoulders. When he is surrounded by men who are older than him who can offer advice, prayer and mentorship, he can be a better husband to you.

5. He is slow to anger.
There is peace in knowing your man holds an even temperament even when he is provoked. A man who allows his feelings, emotions and anger to determine his actions typically has tarnished relationships and is not a healthy place for you or a family.

6. He holds strong conviction on the sacredness of fidelity.
A man is wise when he understand that infidelity and looking for pleasure outside of the marriage only brings strife. God actually calls him to rejoice over you all of his days.

7. He is honorable of your heart and emotional well-being.
I hated when a guy I was dating exposed my embarrassing moments or the private matters of our relationship with his friends. Picking on you may seem cute and funny at first, but it will get old after a while. You should feel honored and safe knowing you can always trust your husband to cover and speak well of you.

8. He is disciplined in living a life of integrity.
Watch how he handles temptation or sticky situations that test his character. Does he choose to do what’s right even when no one is watching? It is imperative to observe these things because it will indicate if you can trust his decision making. When you’re married, almost all of his decisions impact you.

9. Has solid work ethic.

10. He pursues and loves you passionately.
The man you marry should make you feel loved like you’ve never felt before. Safe, accepted, desired, nurtured, protected and comforted. Jesus loves us deeply, he loves us so fiercely, that he willingly gave up his life to save us.

11. Romances you.
I know women who feel guilty or wrong for desiring romance in their relationship, as if they don’t deserve it. But God desires for your heart to be romanced, just as He longs to romance us.

12. He is humble and can admit when he is wrong.
There is nothing worse than a petty conflict blowing out of proportion because your partner refuses to admit they were wrong. Taking responsibility for his actions and apologizing for his mistakes is the sign of a real man.

Again, much of the list is not bad at all. Points 1, 2 and 3 are all rock solid, indeed, I would consider them essential criteria that a Christian woman should look for in a man. Points 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 are also commendable as well. Problems arise with points 7, 10, 11 and 12, however. I will briefly address each in turn.

Point 7– While facially this appears sound, the fact that it covers feelings makes it suspect in my eyes. “Emotional well-being” is a fairly vague term, so without clarification this would be a potential problem area. Otherwise, any man must necessarily be a captive to the woman’s feelings, which would be disaster as many would tell you, especially Empath.

Point 10– Two problems here. The first is the comparison to Jesus. With the toxic hypergamy out there, this is just asking for trouble. No man can possibly compare to Jesus, much less His love. Bringing up that kind of comparison invites men to always fail. Second, all of those feelings are inherently tied into the attractiveness of the man in the woman’s eyes. No matter his other qualities, an unattractive man cannot generate them. And an extremely attractive man full of flaws will provide those same feelings regardless. This point could just as well have been replaced with “Attractive”, and the result would be the same.

Point 11– The real problem with this point is the second sentence. But the first is essentially another version of Point 10, aka, attention from an attractive man. I guess this one could be expanded to include that the man have “Beta” traits in addition to “Alpha” traits (see here for more). As for the second sentence, this is Churchian nonsense (perhaps even to the point of heresy). God does not “romance” us. “Romance” implies Eros, which is fine in the context of marriage, but the love that God holds for us is Agape.

Point 12– Again, on its face not necessarily bad. But when combined with the kinds of attitude displayed at the website, it hints at a desire for a man to debase himself in front of the woman. Not exactly a great thing if you want a healthy relationship.

So, that  is the list. I’ve seen worse, but then again, I’ve seen better. What I think is more troublesome than a list like this is the attitude behind it. Reading through this website, you get a sense of entitlement and expectation which is not healthy and will probably ensure a lifetime of misery for most women. The author of the list might have been able to get away with it, but not every woman looks like this. We, men and women both, must temper our expectations and keep in mind that we are not perfect. So we cannot expect perfection in turn. As for anything further, I will leave that to my married readers to fill in.

Advertisements

42 Comments

Filed under Attraction, Christianity, Churchianity, Courtship, God, Red Pill, Sexual Strategies, Women

42 responses to “The Dreaded “List” Again

  1. In my blue-pill days, I would’ve thought her pretty. Now I just see a soul-sucking vampire.

  2. Deep Strength

    Point 11 exemplifies all of the wrong ones IMO. It’s “feel good” theology which is incorrect.

    11. Romances you.
    I know women who feel guilty or wrong for desiring romance in their relationship, as if they don’t deserve it. But God desires for your heart to be romanced, just as He longs to romance us.

    Emotions, and by extension romanace, are not Truth nor are they agape love.

    I could be “happy” that something terrible happened to my enemies which does not follow Jesus’ command of loving your enemies and doing good to those who persecute you.

    I could be “disgruntled and angry” when I go to a homeless shelter to help the poor or drug addicts because I “feel” like I am wasting my time.

    Jeremiah 17:9 “The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?”

    “Romance” is amoral just as emotions are amoral. However, they more than often lead the heart astray because the heart has been corrupted by sin.

  3. “She has been uniquely gifted in order to carry out a purpose. Her value is rare and precious.”

    She has a very unique gift…rare and precious. It is called a uterus…just like every other woman.

  4. Ton

    Seems like this list has been kicked around before. Is it an old item or just more of the same as awalt

  5. The underlying subtext of this is all wrong. It’s a beta list for Beta’s and women who feel guilty about not dating them. She actively admits dating men that contradict these values. I don’t know the author, but I’d wonder what was involved with dating men that contradicted these things…..

    Likely the usual story. Alpha now -> beta later

  6. @ Leap

    This list is a “beta list”, yes. What the woman (who was a former Miss USA) wanted (and evidently got) was a Righteous Alpha. Of course, they are few and far between. But given her looks and background, she was able to get one. Most Christian women will not be so lucky.

    And as you note, she probably had a few “mistakes” on the way…

  7. @ Ton

    This list source is new, although the list itself doesn’t change all that much.

    @ Earl

    Sharp and to the point, as always.

    @ Deep Strength

    I think that Eros does have a place, but she does seem to make an idol of it, doesn’t she?

  8. Oh man, you’re definitely right. I didn’t go to the original site since you quoted and edited, I did now. She’s definitely attractive, and definitely bad news for reality.

    Also, thanks for removing the scripture. The ones she had that I recognized were painful in how out of context they were.

  9. Deep Strength

    @ Donal

    You are correct. The problem is that “Eros” and the vaguely defined “happiness” have been elevated to the position of Agape by the cuilture, and many Christian men and women buy it. Therefore, when they are unhappy or non-romantic they see it as justification for divorce, because it “feels” like they are not unconditionally loved.

    It is “feel good theology.”

  10. Reading through this website, you get a sense of entitlement and expectation which is not healthy and will probably ensure a lifetime of misery for most women. The author of the list might have been able to get away with it, but not every woman looks like this

    Call me crazy, and I’m only going off the one photo, but I don’t think she’s all that. Definitely nowhere near enough to want to put up with any bongload of crap she might be carting with her.

    But then, I’m apparently the only person in the world (women included) who thinks Angelina Jolie looks like bollocks.

  11. But then, I’m apparently the only person in the world (women included) who thinks Angelina Jolie looks like bollocks.

    No, not the only one. My husband agrees with you.

  12. earl

    “Call me crazy, and I’m only going off the one photo, but I don’t think she’s all that. Definitely nowhere near enough to want to put up with any bongload of crap she might be carting with her.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristen_Dalton_%28Miss_USA%29

    Yup…a lot of crap. Those ladies live in a bubble the likes you’ve never seen. I’m sure she has never met a “no” or opposing opinion in her life.

  13. Most of her blog just oozes feminine solipsistic, entitlement pablum shrink-wrapped in Christianese, but I thought this list would be an interesting contrast to something like Dalrock’s ‘Man up and marry those sluts’ post.

    Essentially this is the Jesus Brand® list that The Rules gals have been hawking for more that a decade now.

    http://therulesbook.com/

  14. Here’s the husband.

    He doesn’t look like a hardcore Alpha gamespitter to me. Just an above average denizen of the Evangelical bubble. The dental work and the not-over-the-top physicality seem to make him a suitable match for his female counterpart, who can be seen here in a more natural state, without her Miss USA panoply. What they have together looks more and more to me like associative mating working like it should, just like this: Associative mating, after all, should take place where sexual options are limited to one per player, and that is what the Evangelical bubble attempts to enforce. Kristen’s advice is another unconscious attempt to keep the Marriage 1.0 mechanism in place in one of the few subcultures where it may actually be possible.

    Please lay off the schadenfreude guys. It dilutes your message. Kristen’s advice works very well for top level Evangelical girls who want what she has but who are being tempted by the buffet at the Sunday morning nightclub. It is probably a recipe for grinding life-long celibacy for girls with less to work with than Kristen but still have no desire to settle for less than what she got.

  15. Call me crazy, and I’m only going off the one photo, but I don’t think she’s all that. Definitely nowhere near enough to want to put up with any bongload of crap she might be carting with her.

    I know I’m a woman and my opinion doesn’t carry as much weight, but I just bothered to click over and look at the blog referenced. That woman is gorgeous by almost any standard, no? Maybe it’s just me.

  16. If that’s not gorgeous, none of us stand a chance lol!

  17. earl

    She was a Miss USA…she is in the elite category of looks.

    And then she decided to write a blog.

  18. If that’s not gorgeous, none of us stand a chance lol!

    I know. I have a friend who often reminds me how picky Internet denizens are compared to men in the real world.

    We stand a chance based on a whole host of other facts besides looks, and the fact that they have certain types they prefer.

    My husband would most likely echo NSR about not being worth the trouble, but she’s not his type. Latinas, black women, curves top as well as bottom; that’s his thing.

    So while he would say that this particular woman does nothing for him, he would never say that she wasn’t “all that”, because in the very general sense, she is lovely. By every objective standard.

  19. deti

    “it almost reads like something that Deti would write.”

    My notoriety precedes me.

  20. She’s a solid 8 on the Tomassi scale. Cute, non-threatening, strikes me as being a bit on the self-conscious side, not a sexual initiator.

  21. My assessment of her attractiveness matches Rollo’s, I would rate her as an “8” as well.

    @ Elspeth

    People on the net tend to be jaded/cynical, as well as have warped perceptions because they are surrounded by fake images all the time. Hence, that outcome.

    @ Asin

    Don’t forget that Looks and Athleticism are only small parts of what makes a man attractive. Status and Power are far more important. There are plenty of good looking “Beta” Christian guys out there who lack any sort of Masculine Power.

  22. Amanda – If that’s not gorgeous, none of us stand a chance lol!

    Only if you assume I’m basing that on a straight line and simply raising the bar. Different guys like different things, and while I wouldn’t say no if she baked me a tray of brownies, she’s nothing I would really go out of my way for.

    For example – back in the day, I thought Bailey on WKRP In Cincinnati was more attractive than Jennifer. I was far from the only one (the fact that Bailey didn’t lug around a list of 12 non-negotiables didn’t hurt, either).

  23. To me she’s an 8 or 9… I’d be comfortable if my husband and I were friends with her and her husband, but if she was my husband’s secretary, I’d be feeling all sorts of threatened!
    She’s head-turning stunning, and if she’s also kind and friendly and lovely to her husband, then she’s in a special category of admirable.
    From her blog she says this:
    “I am even more beautiful on the inside. I am a 10.”
    (Well whatever that means, who can compete with that?!)
    A good woman that attractive would be Temptation for most guys.

    Meanwhile, that list is lame.

    Mostly because she says they’re “NON-NEGOTIABLES”!
    Seriously.
    Even for a beauty queen who’s maintained her virginity and health (apparently she pledged no sex/cigarettes/alcohol/drugs with her parents) this list should be seen as a WISH list.
    Not a non negotiable one!

    Of course the fact that she IS a beauty queen means that she literally had her pick of men, so there was a huge chance she would find one at a young age that actually met all these desires of hers. Good for her.

    To me, the only one that needed to be a non-negotiable for a Christian girl is the first one.
    ‘That he would be a practicing believer.’

    The rest is either a work in progress between the husband and God, or something that just isn’t part of his makeup. So what.
    He doesn’t seek counsel? Well perhaps God will provide opportunity for growth in that area, but it’s not a deal-breaker….stay out of it and pray instead. He’s not romantic at all? Deal with it. Doesn’t mean he’s not a good God-fearing man.

    Writing from a position of privilege is incredibly risky. It has a very similar effect to girls watching Blockbuster Romance movies and imagining themselves as the heroine. Spoils them for real life.

    So Miss U.S.A. posting this list raises Miss Average U.S.A’s expectations, because she’s unlikely to actually look in the mirror and recognise that they simply don’t have the same blank canvas to work with.

    How many average guys with 2 or 3 out of the 12 qualities on the list are going to miss out on Miss Average U.S.A??! Where’s a comparable list of expectations out there for all the girls to read and measure up to?!
    Specks and Planks…

  24. @ NSR

    I know — I was just teasing a bit. She is objectively a very pretty girl, but of course men like their different things :).

  25. ballista74

    But then, I’m apparently the only person in the world (women included) who thinks Angelina Jolie looks like bollocks.

    Me three. I don’t get why anyone sees her as attractive. She’s a 5 on the Ballista Attractiveness Scale.

  26. Angelina Jolie a 5? Really?!
    Objectively I’d hypothetically trade aesthetic genes with her in a flash 🙂
    http://www.paqoo.com/desktopwallpaper/1600×1200/angelina-jolie-picture-7m-best-picture-collection-23t-23658.html

  27. I too must echo my astonishment that Angelina could be considered a “5”. She is unconventionally unattractive, yes, but a 5 seems out of line with my assessment of that rank. Certainly when she was younger her physique alone pushed her above that range. But I guess to each their own.

  28. ballista74

    Like I said, it’s my personal thing, I guess…if people are holding her up as a standard of beauty and I don’t see it in her. I debated between 5 and 6. She has a couple of features that are attractive to me, but a lot that aren’t. The lips have been mentioned at times, but I’m not into that. She’s pretty waifish in a lot of respects, enough to borrow the phrase that she needs to eat a lot of cheeseburgers, stat. Then there’s the tattoos, which for most part (99%) are downright graffiti tagging and just ugly as sin, period. Then there’s the issue of the double mastectomy she had, which eliminated IMO her best physical feature – I understand there’s a reason she did it, but it doesn’t do much good if you’re calling her appearance “attractive” in comparison to other women – if you go off of here, she’s really a 3 or 4. Then besides that, there’s the way she carries herself and her gutter trash morals to add to that, but I was just talking physical (SMV) attractiveness as she was brought up and not anything else.

    To me, Ms. Dalton is so much more physically attractive it’s almost ridiculous.

  29. Ah, I was thinking of Angelina when she was younger, not what she looks like now. Yeah, now with age and tats and the surgery (which I’ve heard was actually unnecessary), she is nowhere near what she used to be.

    Edit: Oh, and I think that 1-10 scale is off as well. Starting at about 5 the women in each ranking are less attractive than I think that rank deserves.

  30. Amanda – @ NSR
    I know — I was just teasing a bit

    Oh, I know, I just saw it as an opening to re-open the eternal debate that has plagued scholars since the days of Athens…”Jennifer or Bailey?”

    Hannah – Angelina Jolie a 5? Really?!
    Objectively I’d hypothetically trade aesthetic genes with her in a flash 🙂
    http://www.paqoo.com/desktopwallpaper/1600×1200/angelina-jolie-picture-7m-best-picture-collection-23t-23658.html

    I wouldn’t even give her that much.

    donalgraeme –
    I too must echo my astonishment that Angelina could be considered a “5″. She is unconventionally unattractive, yes, but a 5 seems out of line with my assessment of that rank. Certainly when she was younger her physique alone pushed her above that range. But I guess to each their own.

    She might have “aesthetic genes.” She also might have been much better looking in the early-to-mid 90s (I’ve only seen a couple of pics of her from that far back, and I vaguely recall a scene she had in the movie “Hackers” around 1995, and in that scene no one was paying attention to her face). For the last ten years or so, though, she just looks… so used up.

    Of course, back in the 80s, when every other guy was having multiple… heart attacks… over Kim Basinger, I thought she looked like a man. So (stop me if you’ve heard this) I’m kind of an outlier.

  31. Michelle Pfeiffer a la Scarface era?!

  32. embracingourfemininity

    She is really really beautiful.
    Regarding her list.. I agree with Hannah, these are “non-negotiable”. The number 1 most important point be that is a believer, of course it would be wonderful for him to have all the other points too, but they definetely shouldn’t be non negotiable .. there is always room for growth. Hannah is right, she’s writing from a position of privilege, for the majority of women a list like that will be to their detriment.

    And Angelina Jolie.. A FIVE?!!! WOW. lol
    I always thought she is stunning.. the only thing that is less conventionally pretty about her is her strong jaw, but her eyes and lips are so beautiful so they kind of counteract that in my opinion.
    Women can be really physically beautiful.. but some women just have that special “vibe” that makes them that much more beautiful, a kind of joy radiating through them.

  33. embracingourfemininity

    definitely** oops

  34. @NSR

    Well, I have to say I am unaware of this debate between Jennifer and Bailey; I’ll have to look them up. In my high school years, the question was between Noel or Ben (Felicity haha). Still haven’t decided lol.

    @EOF

    ** “Women can be really physically beautiful.. but some women just have that special “vibe” that makes them that much more beautiful, a kind of joy radiating through them.” **

    See, this is my girl game master plan. I’m working on the vibe, so when I can’t coast by on my looks anymore, I’ll have something else to carry me through. I call it the Holy Spirit.

  35. You’ll have to pardon my vulgarity here, but she has the look of what I call a ‘lick-it-around-the-edges’ girl. They look pretty good so you think they’ll be fun in bed, but when it comes down to it they’re afraid to get their hands dirty, so to speak.

    I could be wrong of course, but I’ve been with enough of them to know that look and the mannerism.

  36. @Hannah –
    “Angelina Jolie a 5? Really?!
    Objectively I’d hypothetically trade aesthetic genes with her in a flash :)”

    Uh – me too – in a heartbeat. Actually, if I believed in such a thing as reincarnation, I’d probably elect to come back as Alice (from Resident Evil)

  37. Pingback: Turning the Tables on “The List” | Donal Graeme

  38. earl

    I never preferred Angelina Jolie myself…she always looked a little freaky to me.

    I don’t know if she acted like it in real life…but Dawn Wells as Mary Ann on Gilligan’s Island is probably as close to a 10 in looks and character I’ve seen on the boob tube.

  39. Pingback: “The List” and My List | Free Northerner

  40. Pingback: Why Christian Men Choose Not to Get Laid Before Marriage | The Reinvention of Man

  41. Pingback: Missing A Certain Little Something | Donal Graeme

  42. Pingback: Reality Versus Reason | Donal Graeme

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s