Tell, Don’t Listen

Shorter post today, inspired by Deep Strength’s most recent post. He examines covert and overt contracts, and how they relate to men interacting with women. One of the areas that he covers is the infamous “friendzone”, and how nice guys try to use “friendship” to get close to women. As he explains:

This is the covert contract that many immature men run. They think that if they trade emotional support, helping out a woman with things, complimenting her, sending her flowers, or any other “trade of good deeds” will get her to like him more.

While I would like to say needless to say at this  point, I can’t. It remains necessary to say that this strategy doesn’t work well at all. It is also necessary to inform and remind men that they should be careful when discussing emotions with women. As Deep Strength explains:

In general, I would say do not go out of your way to listen to or talk about your emotions with women nor help them out with personal matters. Discussing your emotions with women especially if you are interested in her is something that women do with other women. By doing this early on you are telling her that you’re her friend and not a romantic prospect. Hence, often times said women get angry when they find out later you are really interested in them.

This is one of the classic covert contracts that I discussed earlier. Men think that supporting a woman emotionally and helping her out much like a provider would will make her like him more. In reality the opposite occurs: your actions tell her that you are her friend. When it is revealed that you like her she feels used that you were trying to gain her attraction and affection through underhanded tactics. Although that may not have been your intention it comes off that way. Likewise, such men feel hurt because they actually thought it would work that you could buy her affection.

He is completely spot on here. If you are interested in a woman, keep in mind that you are not her emotional band-aid. And she isn’t yours either.

At the same time, when a woman is emotional there is a potential opportunity for a man to really build up attraction between himself and the woman in question. It relies on you telling her about her emotions, not listening to her tell you about them. As Rollo is fond of saying, women expect, and want, a man who Just Gets It. They don’t want to have to explain themselves to a man. That is a major turn-off for them. On the other hand, if a man can demonstrate that he does, in fact, “get” a woman, that can be a major turn-on.

The tactic I have in mind goes something like this:

  • When a woman starts to talk about how she is feeling, and it is clear that strong emotions are involved, interrupt her. Tell her that you want to hear what happened. And to tell you just the facts. Not for her to tell you how she felt about everything.
  • As she relates the facts, break them down and try to figure out how they would relate to basic female nature. What would frighten her? What would make her anxious? What would excite her? All of this is going on in your head silently.
  • After she has related a few facts, tell her how those facts made/make her feel. Explain what it is that is affecting her, and how.
  • Then ask for her to relate more facts. And repeat the process of analyzing and explaining.
  • As you do this, lower the pitch and volume of your voice subtly. If you can, lean in a bit. Keep eye contact the whole time.
  • Soon you will be able to relate how each fact makes her feel.
  • The real gift is to be able to take this into the future. To read into the situation, guess at the facts she has yet to relate, examine her present emotions and try and infer what happened. Tell her this.
  • You will know you are succeeding when she starts making comments about how you really get her, or for some women, when they go really quiet and just stare at you with astonishment.
  • At this point, you want to have a good “closing move.” Since this is written with Christian men in mind, a hug and/or a light kiss can be quite effective. You’ve already shifted the woman’s strong emotions away from whatever was bothering her towards you. Now you want to shift them from negative to positive emotions.  A hug, perhaps coupled with a kiss or stroking the woman’s hair, can accomplish this.

The goal of all of this is to convince the woman, at an unconscious level, that you truly understand her. That you have pierced the veil of the “feminine mystique” and she is now an open book to you. Few things can elevate a man in a woman’s eyes as much as this. I should point out that this tactic is also high-risk, high-reward. If you aren’t careful you will end up being an emotional band-aid or sponge. It is not a tool for a beginner. You need to have a pretty good understanding of female nature to pull this off. It also helps to be able to “read” people well.  But if it works you can achieve a very strong emotional connection with a woman that translates into a powerful feeling of attraction/arousal on her part.

Hopefully this will be of some help to at least one of my male readers. I have another post in the works on a related matter that I hope will also be beneficial. With luck it will be done by the end of the week.

 

Update: There are a few clarifications I would like to make:

  1. This tool is one that works best on a woman you are somewhat familiar with. Cold reads are difficult, and likely to backfire.
  2. Something like this works best when there is already some interest in you by the woman, but you want to keep that interest going and strengthen it. So it works best after the beginning of any courtship.
  3. Like all tools, use it only when needed. And that is not often. I would only recommend using it once or twice as a serious endeavor during a courtship. Don’t rely on it or use it as a crutch. Remember, the best “tool” in your kit is a strong, masculine frame.
Advertisements

33 Comments

Filed under Alpha, Attraction, Beta, Blue Pill, LAMPS, Masculinity, Red Pill, Women

33 responses to “Tell, Don’t Listen

  1. mdavid

    The DS Reddit post money quote: Civil Marriage that doesn’t respect the man is slavery. This is truth. Demand sacramental marriage or none.

    Regards this post, I abstain from mind games. Reasons:
    1) Patriarchal men are too egotistical. Demand more*.
    2) The masculine is a rock firm and distant to the distaff storm. Stay distant.
    3) Women demand men with a life to “hitch” to. His life is the focus, not hers.
    4) Never pursue women beyond a casual date. Girls choose; men NEXT.

    *Problem: games are often successful since women are so easily manipulated. But what happens five years later when her emotions shift? Games work well for plowing through women like a dolphin through waves but they are cotton candy for men interested in LTR. Want feminine? Be masculine. We get what we pay for.

  2. mdavid

    Shorter Rollo version of my above comment: Nothing is more attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value.. As the more traditional men find the tainted juice just ain’t worth the squeeze men’s MMV will only increase. Rollo again: we are very near peak hypergamy. Women should lock in ASAP. Men should wait or explore better MMPs.

  3. Maea

    You will know you are succeeding when she starts making comments about how you really get her, or for some women, when they go really quiet and just stare at you with astonishment.

    I’m sorry but when I read this I started chuckling. What kind of women have you been hanging around? LOL

    Maybe I hung out in a completely different circle, but most of the women I knew who encountered this with a guy became very suspicious. Then they assumed the guy wanted sex.

  4. Maea

    Demand sacramental marriage or none.

    Agreed, and make sure they understand what a sacramental marriage entails. Not the “it’s sacramental until it’s proven to be invalid” nonsense. How the Church will ever recover from that, I haven’t any idea.

  5. I was confused on the first reading about how to give a “huge and/or light kiss.” How do you give a huge kiss at all let alone make it light?

    [DG: Fixed. Thanks for catching that.]

  6. “Then they assumed the guy wanted sex.” But now you know this is pretty much always the case on some level…right?

  7. mdavid

    Maea, Not the “it’s sacramental until it’s proven to be invalid” nonsense. How the Church will ever recover from that, I haven’t any idea.

    But it’s true many RC marriages in the US are invalid as hell. Remember, both parties must have the intention to marry for life AND be fully open to children. I’m guessing only 3/4 are valid on average. The rest lie.

    make sure they understand what a sacramental marriage entails.

    Yep. A few carefully worded uncomfortable questions is all it takes. But, being secular, most RC marry for kids, taxes, or to keep mom/gf happy.

  8. Feminine But Not Feminist

    On the other hand, if a man can demonstrate that he does, in fact, “get” a woman, that can be a major turn-on.

    Yes, it sure is! Having been on the receiving end of this sort of thing before, I can testify to that.

    The goal of all of this is to convince the woman, at an unconscious level, that you truly understand her. That you have pierced the veil of the “feminine mystique” and she is now an open book to you. Few things can elevate a man in a woman’s eyes as much as this.

    Yes, this. I know a guy that I feel like he really understands me, maybe even better than I understand myself sometimes. He can tell me exactly what I’m feeling, and oftentimes what I’m thinking about, to the point that I’ve actually wondered if he has mind-reading super powers! And you know what? The fact that he can do this really sets him apart. And again, it is quite a turn-on. It also makes it really hard (if not impossible) to keep your guard up with someone that really “gets” you so well (which I think is why it is such a turn-on).

    [DG: Which is why Christian women need to be careful during the courtship process. And Christian men too, for that matter. Women can initiate too.]

    You need to have a pretty good understanding of female nature to pull this off. It also helps to be able to “read” people well.

    It seems like it would also help quite a bit to be familiar enough with the girl that you at least have a good idea of her temperament and what makes her tick. Like, I doubt it would work well (if at all) if a guy approached a random girl that he doesn’t know, PUA-style, and tried to do this. It might work on a rare instance, but only very rarely.

    [DG: Good point. I assumed as much, but didn’t specify in the post. I will edit it shortly to include that.]

    But if it works you can achieve a very strong emotional connection with a woman that translates into a powerful feeling of attraction/arousal on her part.

    Win-win for both parties. 🙂

  9. Feminine But Not Feminist

    @ Maea

    I’m sorry but when I read this I started chuckling. What kind of women have you been hanging around? LOL

    Women who very much enjoy it when he demonstrates that he “gets” them, apparently.

    Maybe I hung out in a completely different circle, but most of the women I knew who encountered this with a guy became very suspicious.

    What’s so suspicious about a guy making an effort to understand a woman, and demonstrating to her that he does, in order to build an intimate connection with her? Do you not want your husband to do that for you, and for himself also?

    Then they assumed the guy wanted sex.

    All guys want sex, like Patrick said. Nothing new there, and nothing wrong with that (as long as they wait until the wedding night to go after it, of course). That’s one of the biggest reasons (if not the biggest) why they get married to begin with. So they can have sex in a regular basis. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Sex = intimacy. And who doesn’t want intimacy?

  10. Maea

    No, I had no idea guys wanted sex at all (eye roll). My statement about women assuming the guy wanted sex refers to the guy trying to manipulate her feelings to get sex. That’s what so suspicious. A lot of women complain about this, especially since the guys don’t have the end goal of putting a wedding ring on her hand.

    I’m also not entirely sure I am convinced by the strategy of telling a woman what she supposedly feels. Most young women have difficulty articulating enough to get through these steps, let alone acknowledge another can tell them what they feel. A lot of them just get mad that a guy interrupted them in the first place.

    Do you not want your husband to do that for you, and for himself also?

    Did I say otherwise?

  11. Maea

    But it’s true many RC marriages in the US are invalid as hell. Remember, both parties must have the intention to marry for life AND be fully open to children. I’m guessing only 3/4 are valid on average. The rest lie.

    Without derailing the thread, the stickiness occurs with the intentions. People can make intentions on their wedding days, and then life happens and they delay (such as with children). It doesn’t necessarily mean they never wanted to, but that’s an entirely different topic.

    Wow, I had no idea your outlook was bleak. The thought of 1/4 as invalid is pretty bad.

    [DG: Personally, given the bad catechesis in the Church right now, and the individualist attitudes of many “Catholics”, I think that 1/4 might be kinda low…]

  12. Feminine But Not Feminist

    My statement about women assuming the guy wanted sex refers to the guy trying to manipulate her feelings to get sex. That’s what so suspicious. A lot of women complain about this, especially since the guys don’t have the end goal of putting a wedding ring on her hand.

    Well none of that applies to what Donal is talking about here. He’s talking about an effective way to build an emotional connection with a woman in such a way that it benefits her (she gets to know that she’s understood) and benefits him (he gets to become more attractive in her eyes). And considering how Donal talks about sex and marriage, it’s implied by default that this is to be done by men who are seeking someone to marry, not by those seeking hookups.

    I’m also not entirely sure I am convinced by the strategy of telling a woman what she supposedly feels. Most young women have difficulty articulating enough to get through these steps, let alone acknowledge another can tell them what they feel. A lot of them just get mad that a guy interrupted them in the first place.

    If you were to ever experience it, you would be certain. Of that, I have no doubt.

    Did I say otherwise?

    No; that’s just the impression I got from reading your criticism of what Donal says in the post. It seems that I misunderstood you, and/or that you perhaps misunderstood what Donal’s underlying point and intentions are in this post. Probably both. My apologies.

  13. Maea

    I’m not convinced by all of the means to the ends, FBNF. I should have more clear. No need to apologize. I do agree more with mdavid on this, as it seems more like mind games.

  14. @ mdavid

    Regards this post, I abstain from mind games

    Everything is a mind-game david. Everything. Distance, which you call for later, is a mind game.

    Don’t really get you on this:

    1) Patriarchal men are too egotistical. Demand more*.

    and the attendant subpart.

    2) The masculine is a rock firm and distant to the distaff storm. Stay distant.

    Not incompatible with the occasional use of this. A clinical, almost amused tone throughout is what I used when I got the best effect from this.

    3) Women demand men with a life to “hitch” to. His life is the focus, not hers.

    Agreed.

    4) Never pursue women beyond a casual date. Girls choose; men NEXT.

    Also agreed. Nothing new here, or incompatible with what I talked about.

    As the more traditional men find the tainted juice just ain’t worth the squeeze men’s MMV will only increase.

    True, MMV will increase. But that doesn’t help when the product that is available decreases.

    Women should lock in ASAP. Men should wait or explore better MMPs.

    Agreed.

  15. @ Maea

    I’m sorry but when I read this I started chuckling. What kind of women have you been hanging around? LOL

    I don’t hang around with women much. When I do, it is only (provided I can help it) with quality women. Which may explain why I don’t hang around women much.

    Maybe I hung out in a completely different circle, but most of the women I knew who encountered this with a guy became very suspicious.

    There is a good point to be made about this. The truth is that such “tactics” are far more likely to come from men who fall in the PUA category rather than a Christian man interested in a chaste courtship. However, what this reveals is not what you might think- it is that non-Christian men tend to have more experience with women and know more (and better) ways to approach and build attraction than most Christian guys. There is nothing immoral about this kind of “tactic.” The purpose for which it is used determines its nature. It is just that most Christian men who are serious about chastity are clueless here.

    Then they assumed the guy wanted sex.

    I will admit that this made me laugh. I gathered that you meant that they only wanted sex, but still.

  16. @ FBNF

    What’s so suspicious about a guy making an effort to understand a woman, and demonstrating to her that he does, in order to build an intimate connection with her? Do you not want your husband to do that for you, and for himself also?

    Actually, I understand the suspicion here. Most chaste-minded Christian guys are kinda clueless here. Anyone who starts demonstrating real “talent” with women should trigger a red-flag. Careful vetting is important.

    And considering how Donal talks about sex and marriage, it’s implied by default that this is to be done by men who are seeking someone to marry, not by those seeking hookups.

    Exactly. I’m not writing for PUAs here. Heck, most of this is already known to them. They have even more tricks up their sleeves than this.

  17. mdavid

    DG, Everything is a mind-game david. Everything. Distance, which you call for later, is a mind game.

    It’s not a game if it’s really me. Women can take me or leave me; I”m ok with either. I’m not ok with being a behavioral slave. No woman is worth it.

    I don’t call for distance as a tool; I call for it because it’s proper masculine behavior that God (or Darwin, take your pick) evolved in normal men. Normal women thus desire it but that’s a byproduct.

    Patriarchal men don’t let women drive their behavior as a matter of form. That game is for the 3 R’s (Roissy, Roosh, ) and they play it well. And are welcome to every barrel of tainted juice they squeeze out of modern women. Personally, I don’t want it. Let ’em cull the herd.

  18. theshadowedknight

    MDavid, just be yourself is terrible advice, especially because the man looking for advice is being himself and failing. Being yourself is not good in and of itself. It is only as useful as it gets what you want. Most men are fairly pathetic, and they need to change, not be themselves.

    Telling a woman how she feels is a lot simpler than listening to her whine. It gets her feelings out of the way. Once you tell her how she feels, you can tell her what to do. Solving problems is another thing men are meant to do. Cut to the chase, get it done, and move on.

    Social tricks like this work on everybody, not just women. It is all a social game. You do not get what you want by walking up to someone and telling them to give it to you. You have to come to some kind of deal or arrangement. Play the game, but do not pretend that you are not playing. No one believes that for a second.

    The Shadowed Knight

  19. mdavid

    TSK, MDavid, just be yourself is terrible advice, especially because the man looking for advice is being himself and failing. Being yourself is not good in and of itself. It is only as useful as it gets what you want. Play the game, but do not pretend that you are not playing. No one believes that for a second.

    I never said just be yourself. Because we are sinners, born into sin. The “just be yourself” bullshit is Satan and heretics whispering OSAS. I said: become what you were born to be. Merit heaven. 99.9% of men don’t lead, don’t stand up for themselves, don’t tailor their clothing, don’t work extremely hard, don’t exercise and study like fiend, don’t network, don’t take risks, don’t demand more from women. Sin (sloth and fear and pride and lust and greed) gets in the way. So games.

    But it’s no game, it’s a war for your very soul. So be up front about your rank in the SMP and MMP and work to improve it. Don’t tolerate the female imperative, ever. That’s Eve, not Mary, talking, and she’s simply not worth it. Demand more. Certainly refuse to play feminine mind games as a shortcut. Have masculine standards. So few men are masculine, patriarchal men today; it’s why mind Games are, as I said, so successful in this era. Game apes the truly masculine, and Eve is starving for it.

    Life is hard, so everyone is trying to cheat at it. Debt, sex, birth control, gluttony, mind games. Nobody is willing to accept the pain necessary to get what they desire through merit. Besides, mind games, like drugs, never work for LTRs because one doesn’t want a lifetime, non-refundable relationship with some ditz who lacks such sense (Maea explains this above). Seek sensible women or none at all. Be better. Merit heaven.

  20. Without derailing the thread, the stickiness occurs with the intentions. People can make intentions on their wedding days, and then life happens and they delay (such as with children). It doesn’t necessarily mean they never wanted to, but that’s an entirely different topic.

    Wow, I had no idea your outlook was bleak. The thought of 1/4 as invalid is pretty bad.

    In the US it’s probably more than 1/4 which are invalid under the criteria of “intention to marry for life”, where that is construed to mean that divorce is literally impossible. I’d guess that a large majority of Catholic weddings fail that test, because one or both harbors the idea that divorce, while undesirable and perhaps even sinful, is still possible in dire straits. I think that can be used to declare a marriage null.

    Zippy once wrote that it would be perhaps useful for people to be required to periodically reaffirm their intention (i.e., confirm that they had the proper intention and had it at the time the marriage was entered into), so as to foreclose annulments down the line. That would be one way to do it. Perhaps a more intensive examination and more written affirmations at the beginning would help as well, but the problem is that people can and do lie, all the time, to priests when they are getting married, because they just want to get through it. And if they lie, then anything they signed is irrelevant, really, because the actual intention was not there at the beginning, and so, upon challenge, the marriage can be declared to be null.

    Another way would be to alter the way that the sacrament is administered so as to be less dependent on intention in this way, but that is both exceptionally unlikely to happen and likely overkill for something that appears to be mainly a problem in North America, when you look at global annulment numbers.

  21. Generally speaking, as I walk through a relationship more I tend to agree with mdavid here. Not that there’s not a place for this type of thing which there is as it’s leadership over and through emotions. But it is also a fine line of helping a woman with her emotions versus being that friend who is listening to them.

    It’s cleaner and less confusing for men solely to focus on becoming more masculine rather than delving into the intricacies of emotions. In most cases you don’t need to deal with them. It’s just better to shut up and hold her to be her rock as she weathers the storm.

  22. Maea

    Perhaps a more intensive examination and more written affirmations at the beginning would help as well, but the problem is that people can and do lie, all the time, to priests when they are getting married, because they just want to get through it.

    Hmm…I’m inclined to agree with you, but this sounds tricky. Yes, people lie and if there was a way to challenge people to be completely honest the Church should do it. I’d like to see the Church throw out the PREPARE assessments and force them to face the wall of truth.

    Potential issue–would it open the Church to criticism it’s making marriage even more difficult for people? The Church already does in a way, by making marriage more about the paperwork than a sacrament.

    In the US it’s probably more than 1/4 which are invalid under the criteria of “intention to marry for life”, where that is construed to mean that divorce is literally impossible.

    If there’s more criteria, it explains why annulments are handed out like free milk in N. America.

  23. Maea

    @DG

    I will admit that this made me laugh.

    I tried.

    I gathered that you meant that they only wanted sex, but still.

    Yes, that is what I meant.

    However, what this reveals is not what you might think- it is that non-Christian men tend to have more experience with women and know more (and better) ways to approach and build attraction than most Christian guys. There is nothing immoral about this kind of “tactic.” The purpose for which it is used determines its nature. It is just that most Christian men who are serious about chastity are clueless here.

    Actually, I understand the suspicion here. Most chaste-minded Christian guys are kinda clueless here. Anyone who starts demonstrating real “talent” with women should trigger a red-flag. Careful vetting is important.

    I understand the moral is to teach chaste men how to attract a woman. But on the flip side, chaste Christian women struggle to distinguish the “talented” men from the chaste men who want marriage. I have ideas for the women, but they are difficult to convince.

    From my teens, I’ve heard story after story from young chaste Christian women who were supposedly “courted” by the guy from church only to find out they were just another player. You know, church ministry wannabe by day, player by night? One of my friends was quite perceptive and mature for her age, and when she caught onto one of these guys she ditched him. We were 17. She was blessed to find her now-husband and marry at 20.

    Not all young women are perceptive, and the ones who are will default to suspicion.

  24. mdavid

    Nova, …but the problem is that people can and do lie….actual intention was not there at the beginning, and so, upon challenge, the marriage can be declared to be null.

    Just because a marriage might be null doesn’t mean the Church has to grant an annulment. Buyer beware. Get it signed in triplicate with gruesome details about what could happen (abuse, infidelity, abandonment). Tough luck after that unless he’s a proven lost cousin, not consummated, or shotgun wed). It’s really not hard. There would be less RC marriages (less RC, period) as it should be. Many (most?) American RC are pagan, some amalgam of protestant and MTD. The bishops should read 1 Cor 11:27. The Church should grow smaller. Many are called, few are chosen.

  25. mdavid

    Maea, …church ministry wannabe by day, player by night? One of my friends was quite perceptive…she ditched him.

    Snorting again. If she was actually chaste, he would have ditched her.

  26. “The goal of all of this is to convince the woman, at an unconscious level, that you truly understand her.”

    I agree with the general principle of this post and the context in which you would use this tool but not as much the motivation and execution. In the end – for the Christian man, this is counseling people out of a strong, masculine frame. It is reading people for the purpose of being helpful and it applies to interactions with both men and women, irrespective of romantic interest. The stirring of romantic interest is a by-product of being helpful. The outcome independence (lack of covert contract) is attractive.

    What this looks like: You are telling her the story of who she is – her dreams, fears, and desires – in a way she could not fully articulate on her own. This story gives fuller meaning to the complexity of her emotions – integrating everything into an image that captures the essence what she has experienced.

    Example: “From what you shared about your childhood, I got the sense you were an outsider looking in. As if you were standing outside your own home, watching your family have dinner together and you were pounding on the glass patio door, hoping to come in. But no one even noticed.”

    At that point, if you had romantic interest, you would empathize and then perhaps, attempt some kind of closing move.

  27. Maea

    mdavid, it may be hard to believe but many guys are persistent to get what they want. It’s not a secret or anything that men like the chas(t)e.

  28. My instincts growing up were to be cold and distant toward any woman I wasn’t actively dating or courting or whatever. The cultural narrative – be super nice and be her friend and eventually you’ll win her over – never sat right with me, but I gave it a try and failed miserably of course. Discovering the manosphere was great for me in the sense that it confirmed my instincts had been right all along.

  29. mdavid, it really happens… I was dating a guy when 18 for only 4 months who was a youth pastor, seemed really chaste, wanted to “court” me instead of just date me. I found out he was living a double life – a chaste youth pastor on Sunday, but a player other nights. He wanted a chaste Christian girl (virgin obviously – a good girl) as a status symbol I think. After catching him in a couple of lies, and actually seeing his double life, I dumped him and moved on. Ended up with my husband the next summer, dated 6 months, he proposed, and we married 6 months later. We’ve been married 8 years now 😀 but wow! I can’t imagine what my life would have been like if I tried to stay with that man. He reminds me a lot of Josh Duggar in the way that he seemed so Christian, but was hiding serious promiscuity – and yet felt no conviction about being a Youth Pastor.

  30. mdavid

    chaste youth pastor on Sunday, but a player other nights

    Players know where the action is. Wasting 4 months chasing chaste girls? Not much of a player. My guess? He does quite well on church hunting grounds. Smoke = fire.

    But if players are now interested in church girls just for arm candy, we have clearly reached the end of civilization. When getting seduced, girls damn well deserves the real deal, not some confused simp. What’s the world coming to? I’m feeling sorry for chicks. Paging Rossy.

  31. Hmm, Donal is correct here, but that is a rather complex and advanced move that takes some skill. I can understand why the idea would evoke some humor, if you’ve ever watched it done poorly by a man that clearly wants sexual access, women are not so easily deceived and men are not always so good at reading us.

  32. “Players know where the action is. Wasting 4 months chasing chaste girls? Not much of a player. ”

    Yes, he did know where the action was, and it was not with me… hence why when I found out, I dumped him promptly! Would you say Josh Duggar wasn’t much of a player just because he spent so much time devoted to courting Anna? Do players bother getting married, or spend years creating 4 kids with a wife? You’re right that they do know where the action is, and he was a total player who had a multitude of affairs on her, paid over 1,000 for keeping two Ashley Madison accounts and displayed his sexual fetishes online for us all to see now. He was never true to her or capable of being a husband despite all the effort he put in to making his life appear to be holy and pure. Players come in all shapes and sizes, and the most dishonest ones are the wolves in sheep’s clothing that go after virgin church girls for the status symbol while living a life of debauchery in secret. It probably doesn’t happen often I’d think. But it does happen, and they really are players.

    They aren’t actually into the chaste girls, they just want to look good on Sunday while being in Church leadership.

    Interestingly, after we broke up he went a little nuts… and eventually fell completely away from Christianity (shows you how devoted he actually was to begin with… it was all a lie, time and truth walk hand in hand). Now he looks truly horrible having lived about 10 years in sin, gained a lot of weight, drinks and smokes, and I think cohabits with a girl, never finished his college degree, and probably doesn’t even attend church much less be a leader in a church. At least he has a job, and I do wish him well. He had so much godly potential but threw it all away. If I had married him, I’m almost 100% sure he would have cheated on me… he was already planning what he’d be doing as a pastor of a church, and who would be his secretary – a sexy girl he once had the hots for agreed to be it for him! No kidding!!! All these things were red flags to me, like they should have been.

    My husband is a totally different story, he wasn’t a good Christian… he was just a cradle Catholic with a variety of pleasure sins, and much more of an actually player having been with girls before me. But he actually cared about me, was more honest than the fake Christian youth pastor, and says that it was my faith that inspired him to have a real faith in God – and he has backed his words with actions from day 1. Its ironic how different they are now, my husband’s become an amazing man of God and spiritual leader of our family… the other has become a degenerate, sinful man fornicating with his girlfriend and no where near being a spiritual leader of anyone.

  33. Pingback: Blogging Again | younggodlywomen

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