Beta Males and Food Porn: A Unique Take on Shepherd’s Pie

My next post—up tomorrow—will be shocking, at least for some. What if a woman reader, amongst many similar, doesn't much care for the Paleo "feminists"? What if, instead, she has the audacity, the self-confidence and the courage to take on alpha males, accepting no substitute? She sent me a B&W artsy nude of herself taken by a pro, along with permission to post it, name attached. Beta males who only suck up to feminists get only to see what I post about it. They never get sent a photo like that. Laf.

Don't worry, betas. You'll have plenty of OMG ammo for further sucking up, once you see that post. ...After all, it's quite a task to keep size 16 panties in a bunch...and débutantes feeling cathartic. You need material. I'm happy to provide it. You're welcome. (Don't misunderstand. My comment threads are replete with alphaT. Not what I'm talking about.)

...I drafted a whole post last night, chopped it through the woman who's gracing us, slept on it and the moment I woke up, knew I was not going to post it. I had far wider integrations to make on the subject of feminism, misogyny, débutantes...and size 16 bunched panties. Stay tuned.

In the meantime, I had food inspiration this afternoon I thought I'd share. I had a half eaten rotisserie chicken carcass. I had potatoes. I had onions. My first thought was a chicken soup with the heartiness of potatoes. Next idea: a mash with some sort of hearty chicken dish on the side. Then I thought of shepherd's pie, a mainstay of pub food. Bingo.

So here's a one-off chicken variation. First, you have to make your stew. I broke up the carcass, added as little water and chicken stock as possible to cover (you have to reduce, later, so don't fuck yourself up), boiled it, strained, keeping the pot on boil and reducing as the chicken cools so you can get all the meat off.

In the meantime, half an onion chopped, sautéd to full, important caramelization in butter. Then, a couple of large potatoes in the nuker, 5 minutes on one side, 2-3 on the other. Skin falls off, mash them into the butter and caramelized onion with a couple of splashes of heavy cream or H&H. Set it aside, best is in the oven on 170F warm, covered.

Go back to work on your stew. Should be well reduced by now. You can tell by tasting. If it has a watery taste (not consistency), not reduced enough. Add a couple of level teaspoons of dried tarragon (less is more; be careful). Go to work on separating your chicken meat and tossing it in the pot. Prepare a cold water or cold stock slurry with your powdered starch of choice. I use potato starch. Introduce it to the boiling pot once you don't have a watery taste. Salt & pepper to taste.

Spread your potato & onion mash all over your bowl & up the sides. Sorry, was in a rush; all pics from the phone cam. You can see the level of the caramelization of the onions.

IMG 1122
 

Then introduce your hearty chicken stew, and since lemon always goes well with chicken & tarragon, splurge a little. Beta male tip: you'll definitely want to get those seeds out of the lemon. You don't want to incur wrath.

IMG 1125
 

Now comes the shepherd's pie knock off part. Take the other half of your mash and make pancakes (alphas: with your hands; betas: figure it out). You'll need to use one of those thin & flat short-order cook spatulas to quickly—without hesitation or trepidation—whip it right off that surface. Or, you can use the beta male-method of lining the cutting board with plastic wrap, oh so gently lifting it off, then pealing it off. Overt gentleness is the key, there. Make sure someone notices. Bonus points if she's a staunch feminist.

IMG 1123
 

The rest is obvious. That goes on the top, another slice of lemon, and it's fired under the broiler for a few.

IMG 1127
 

And that's how you get an idea in the late afternoon, work out the details, swear off all cookbooks for life, do your own shit and fix a meal for your misyginist loving wife that's never ever been made before.

Cookbooks are mostly for betas.

Comments

  1. WTF IS UP WITH THAT FIRST SENTENCE? Fix it, please. It hurts my intellect.

  2. Er. Second sentence*

  3. ladysadie1 says:

    I love the hand prints in the pancakes. Yum!!!

  4. Who are the betas you are making fun of? I assume there’s a point, since most people who talk about alphas and betas sound like they’re in high school. Maybe I’m just not getting it since you aren’t trashing on religion, government, or other fictions.

    • “…most people who talk about alphas and betas sound like they’re in high school. ”

      Is that according to the highly lauded, peer reviewed book of redneck?

      Let me give you a clue. I never take seriously anyone who uses the phrase “sounds like” in a sentence.

      • Well, I have to admit I’m getting pretty sick of the alpha/beta thing myself. Like narcissism and a bunch of other pop psychology terms, or the logical fallacies, it’s becoming a hackneyed shortcut for actual thought in many quarters. Although, come to think of it, paleo has also already suffered from this pop devaluation and I expect it to slide into meaninglessness in the future if it hasn’t already.

      • “Although, come to think of it, paleo has also already suffered from this pop devaluation and I expect it to slide into meaninglessness in the future if it hasn’t already.”

        I know what you mean. I too pine for the day when there was a lone dominant alpha, a neat top-down hierarchy with a single guiding doctrine.

        It’s so messy now, like, like, ANARCHY and CHAOS!

        Whoa, you’ve stumbled onto the subject of my next post.

        That earns you an Adrea Dworkin Commemorative Edition Pink Cock Ring. I’ll get it right out to you.

      • A word or concept declining in value because it is diluted or co-opted is usually because it has been adopted by an ignorant or willfully deceptive hierarchy. See liberalism, et al.

  5. Was going to write redneck anarchist, but I am what I am.
    It just took me back to the days of casual weightlifting forums and the retards who frequented them (including me), so yeah it was subjective. I also went to a military academy where nearly every single guy thought he was ‘alpha.’ Don’t remember any who ever were, some were leaders in their areas of expertise, but that was about it. So what are the highly lauded, peer reviewed books on these types of social dynamics in humans?

  6. Can’t wait to read what you have to say on this subject!

  7. Happymisogynist says:

    Do you think shes paleo

    http://i.imgur.com/t3ORi.png

  8. He's Alive! says:

    The hot, hot news is the paleosphere is that Art is back in the public domain! Yeah baby – http://www.artdevanyonline.com/blog.html.

  9. Now, I have a question – especially as Alpha men always seem to rag on us fat women…especially online.

    And excuse me, gentlemen. This one’s going to ramble a little as I’m only providing a less strident woman’s point of view. I not out to villify you and make you change your mind or soften your opinions. I just offer an alternative view.

    What happens if I’m one of those women you described – a Paleo woman who’s suspicious of modern feminism, and hates the deal that feminism has given us. We’re more masculine and goal-oriented than ever before, but also more bitter, unhappy and entitled.

    A year ago I realised I was unhappy with the hopelessly ineffectual beta men I attracted and I also realised the fact I was attracting them was entirely my fault. I weight 108 kilo, had boy-short hair, dressed like a man in jeans and Dr Marten’s boots, swore like a sailor and refused to listen to a man in any way. I was agressive. It wasn’t until I realised that I wanted a strong man who could run things like a man should, that I realise I needed to change.

    Since then I’ve grown my hair out, lost a bunch of weight (but I can still be considered quite large), stopped swearing, dress in skirts, dresses and heels and have learned to serve the men in my life. I have realised that in order to attract a masculine man, I needed to stop repressing my womanly side, the one that WANTS to take care of a man and dress girly. It has awoken my submissive side, and the ball-breaking bitch I used to be is dead. For good. I’m not letting her come back ever.

    Now, this is where my question comes in – because since changing my energy to a soft feminine one, I have more positive male attention than I’ve ever had in my LIFE. Men treat me nicely now, I’m no longer invisible. They smile at me in the street, I’ve had an extremely successful dating life in a country where there’s no real dating culture and I’ve landed myself a man who is both devestatingly handsome, and who is undeniably Alpha. He is the dominance to my submission.

    But I wear those size 16 knickers you so disparage.

    Is my desire to be kind, to nuture, and to serve the men in my life entirely negated by my weight? Is it really so impossible for my broad backside to completely remove the charm that is a woman who speaks to men with respect and looks to them for leadership, and then in turn TRUSTS them enough to follow without protest?

    Because my life experience has taught me that it isn’t true. I have Alpha men in my life (my father for one) who now handle me with kid gloves and go out of their way to make me happy, because I make them feel good about who they are and I am deeply, deeply grateful for the protection and care they provide. And I make them feel like good men, despite my thunder thighs.

    Now, I’m definitely not saying you have to find me attractive because I’m ‘curvy’. That’s not my argument. My argument is simply ‘As long as you’re not a total hambeast, you’d be surprised how little it is about looks. Once basic attraction is established, it’s about having your needs met, size be damned’.

    • Amy Haines says:

      Ever see the film PCU, Natalie? Pretty much what you describe is summed up in one short scene where one butchy “Womynist” has a moment of truth:

      Jock #1: [at a party] What’s up, babes?
      Womynist #1: Pack up your rape culture and take a hike!
      Jock #1: [holds up a beer] You want a brewdog?
      Womynist #1: We’re not interested in your penis!
      Womynist #2: Wait, wait, I think he’s offering us a beer.
      [turns to jock, speaks slowly]
      Womynist #2: Um… Yes. We, would like, a beer.
      Jock #1: Okay!
      [turns around to get a beer]
      Womynist #1: So it’s like, if you’re nice to them, they *bring* you things?
      Womynist #2: Exactly.

      So, there is some condescension towards the jock as being an idiot errand boy. If you can see the scene it comes off pretty funny, I couldn’t find a clip online. The Womynist realizes that if she stops being so GRRRR ANGRAY!! at men all the time, for no particular reason, maybe her life would go more smoothly and she wouldn’t have to be so GRRRR! all the time. Sounds like you had a moment like that yourself, whatever the particular catalyst.

      I graduated high school in 1994. Androgyny seemed to be the order of the day for counter-cultural types and I embraced the Doc Martens/baggy jeans/short haircut too, and always felt like I was missing something. I started having dreams that I was brushing my short hair and it was magically growing longer and longer. One day I was at a flea market and saw some pretty lace-y boho skirts and sandals and bought them. Once I started wearing them I felt so girly, I even started wearing makeup like a girl and not a vamp again. INSTANT MALE ATTENTION. And I was heavy at that point, upwards of 160 lbs. It also kick-started me into a better lifestyle so I would lose the weight and get healthy. I stopped smoking, cut out recreational drugs (I was aging-out of that habit anyway), and started working out. Several years later I met the man I would marry and I am considerably dumbstruck in love with his assertive sexy ass. The woman who loved to hate and be angry all the time and found nothing but disappointment on the career ladder is now a lot sweeter and happier at home cleaning floors and cooking food for him and our children. Go figure, all it took was one skirt to start the cascade…

      If you followed the thread on School Lunches, the exchange between A.B. Dada, Woo, ladiesadie, Galina, et. al. was primarily about attraction. I think A.B. Dada hit it perfectly with one simple statement, no further argument required: “be feminine and demure.” It is really that easy. You can have an education, you can have a job, be assertive when necessary, and even have strong emotions, but if you do it all with feminine grace and let demure be the default setting, it will carry you a long way towards attracting the right attention. (Oh, and when I say “you” I am not specifically calling you out, Natalie, or anyone; I’m generalizing.)

      And regarding the Size 16 bunched panties, Richard is being playful there. Take the sarcasm for what it is. I can’t wait to read his post tomorrow.

      • ‘And regarding the Size 16 bunched panties, Richard is being playful there. Take the sarcasm for what it is’

        Argh, Amy. You’re right. I *do* get my size 16 panties in a bit of a twist as I read a lot of ‘Manosphere’ blogs that just RIP into fat women like we’re nothing. I think the dating culture and ‘cult of self-esteem’ is very different in America to what it is here (very little dating, and tall poppy syndrome) so those men reacting vociferously to a phenomenon I don’t see a lot of. That’s why it confuses me, I think. I just for some reason picked this post to finally ask that question.

        ‘Be feminine, and demure’ – include obediant and that’s my life’s goal :D

      • Amy Haines says:

        The visceral reaction to fatness is partly natural, partly based on the way “fat” girls present themselves. I don’t know how it is in your neck of the woods (UK, I’m guessing?), but in America, the general state of dress and carriage is deteriorating to the point of absurdity. I used to teach high school. Fat girls (and I mean really fat, not just carrying a few extra pounds) would wear skin tight pants and belly shirts, skinny jeans that allowed their “muffin tops” to explode over the waist bands, and generally looked like they did not care for their appearance (much like I was at that age). Or, they would put a lot of effort into looking purposely messy and unkempt, which I don’t understand.

        When I go to the grocery store, I often see one mom and daughter pair shopping together. I would put the mom in her late 40s and the daughter at 15 or 16. They dress alike, with the mom copying the daughter, wearing too-tight yoga pants and halter tops which show their “back boobs.” The general idea that they should be accepted because they flaunt it is what is doing harm to overweight women (and many men too, I must add, because I see a lot of men who do nothing to take care of themselves on the weight/health front).

        I have seen some overweight women make an effort to appear feminine and pretty despite their weight and they are knockouts. Many of them are at my gym, working on their bodies as they cultivate an outward appearance of beauty on their existing assets, be it nice skin or a pretty face. They don’t throw their fat in anyone’s face and demand it be accepted. A rude attitude that demands respect from people is never easy to accept or handle, and therein lies the rub of fat acceptance, many forms of feminism, etc.

        FTA talks a lot about anarchy/minarchy and personal freedom. I am 100% in support of people doing as they choose, but there are always consequences to actions, and if someone does not accept X quality in you, it is a consequence of YOUR behavior, not necessarily the other person’s lack of understanding. The other person lacking empathy carries its own consequences, too. It’s the DEMAND for acceptance, on the part of the offending individual, that grates and drives a general feeling of hatred towards the behavior or physical attribute in question (in this case, fatness).

      • Amy Haines says:

        @Natalie, regarding obedience, I think the words “obedient” and “submissive” carry negative connotations and some confusion. Think about how you will become or be “obedient.”

        Would I characterize myself as obedient? Yes, generally. I would never openly defy a decision once made, especially in large matters like household spending or childrearing. My husband and I are pretty much agreed in our approach to childrearing (my desire to homeschool being the sole exception that comes to mind), and give each other gentle reminders or have debates over the best ways to approach the care and feeding of young ones. Same with money and finances – on every level, we both know we need very little in terms of stuff, any kind of stuff, and so spend very little money on clothes and shoes, nights out (with two tods and an infant, impossible anyway). We agree on how much to save and what to spend on keeping up the house, so in a way it’s easy to say I’m “obedient” because we agree on so many issues.

        When a debatable issue comes up, we debate about it, and consider each others feelings and opinions, but since my husband makes the money (and trusts me to spend it wisely) I feel it is incumbent upon me to defer to his final decision.

        Being obedient does not mean I have no input or stake or cannot debate a matter with him, it means being responsible to my role as primary caregiver of the children and manager of the household finances, budget, and meal planning.

        I am never, ever directly commanded to do anything, nor do I ever directly command. This dynamic is subconscious for me, and was from the start – it’s only since I started reading more widely that I understood it as falling into a natural (for me) role. I don’t grate at ALL instances of authority, if I can respect, admire, and have love for that source of authority, because it removes the greater part of responsibility and thinking about my actions; a path is chosen and I follow it, a very low stress approach to daily living.

      • Amy – *laugh*

        These words are SO LOADED, don’t you think? You say them then people openly froth at the mouth. I mean, just look below. People automatically assume brainlessness and abuse, but hey, that’s their bag to deal with. I would never allow a man to hurt or use me, as I know I’m worth more. I will not bow to a tyrant, but then I would never pick a tyrant as a partner, so obediance is really just plain old respect. As you say, low stress! :D

      • Thanks for defining what you mean by obedient – those words do come loaded with a ton of cultural baggage that can shut down productive conversation in a hurry! Appreciate you explaining it more clearly, and glad you’ve found happiness. Also appreciate you saying that this is ‘for you’, rather than making sweeping statements that if only all women/men thought this way, they’d be much happier.

      • @itsthwoooo

        “Obedience is your life goal? I’d say that’s a pretty sad depressing life goal”

        Who are you to judge my life goals?

    • dr. gabriella kadar says:

      Woo, I don’t think the point here is ‘personality’. It’s about ‘in your faceness’ or about communication style and behaviour.

      Good relationships are mutually supportive and cooperative. Both partners should endevour to be kind to and considerate of one another. I don’t think the woman who is cooking meals and whatnot is at the same time being thrown to the wall by some sort of raging bull ‘pseudo’ alpha male. Whatever roles the two people have worked out which result in a satisfying relationship, that’s theirs.

      Clearly the woman did search inside of herself and figured out what she wants, needs and what makes her happy. The fact that she has expressed herself indicates that she has not turned herself into some sort of Stepford wife. I don’t think she’s compromised her life. She has learned to be effective.

      Besides which, we’ve heard her side of things only. We don’t know what the alpha male has to say about his behaviour, his communication style or his ways of contributing to the relationship and why.

      • Here’s how I see this Wooo comment.

        Natalie is her own individual and it’s impossible to. Really know or judge anything about that. And for me, not even a little bit.

        As general advice, spot on, for me.

      • Wooo,

        It’s interesting to me that from one word ‘obediant’ – you’ve managed to make me out as entirely brainless (‘stupid, skill-less, mindless, feel a need to stand on my hindlegs like an unfortunate retarded inbred poodle doing tricks pretending to be useless and stupid) and weak ( minimizing opinions, submissive woman child-in need of male support and assistance for all tasks).

        These are all very nasty sentiments to sling around, and very extreme things to conflate, just because you take exception to the idea of obediance. Or rather to the idea of WHAT YOU THINK obediance means.

        You assume I’ve adopted this as a mask of manipulation, rather than just letting this natural side of me see the light.

        Just because I am obediant, and it is a goal to become more so, doesn’t make me brainless. It doesn’t make me weak (I’m standing up to you, aren’t I?), it doesn’t make me a retarded lap-dog, it makes me true to a very deep-rooted part of my nature. If you refuse to see or accept that, and calling me stupid, manipulative, and meek makes *you* feel better about *my* choices, then go ahead. I have nothing to lose from it. It just makes me sad that you have conflated such negative things with something that in a loving, caring context (my relationship) is a virtue.

        Obediance:
        – Compliance with someone’s wishes or orders or acknowledgment of their authority.
        – Submission to a law or rule.

        Funny – I don’t see ANYTHING about poodles, stupidity, false vapidity or retardation in there at all…

      • -You dressing really cute, not being a slob, making eye contact, being charming, smiling… but being outspoken and assertive and unapologetic about your thoughts and opinions [while always being aware of the company you are keeping, knowing when to give it a rest even if it means it's the last time you keep such company]

      • Why do you continue to assume that just because I choose submission and obediance that I’m NOT outspoken and assertive and unapologetic about my thoughts and opinions? Why do you assume that any man that values a submissive and obediant partner wants to quash her personality and ride roughshod over her rights?

        You have a great deal of negative, pre-concieved ideas about what these words mean. Admittedly, they are very loaded words, but how else can I express my desire to take male guidance while still maintaining my personality and intelligence boundaries?

        Your issues with the word ‘obediance’ are not mine to deal with.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Natalie, kudos for proving your point that you do have not given up your personality and ability to be assertive! You are clearly well spoken, and you are presenting your side of thinks without stooping to the level of demanding, screeching harpy!

      • Madam, you and I have very different views on what the word obediance means.

        From your context, no matter what I say, or how intelligently or succinctly I make my argument, you will never see me as ‘a human adult with an in tact [sic] free mind’.

        Therefore further discussion is pointless. Besides, I’m sick of being told the way I want to live my life is wrong.

        Live long and prosper.

        BTW, I checked out your blog. I like your methodical approach and writing style, and to use an Americanism – Dang, girl. You fly. I’ll read your blog with interest from now on.

      • Thank you, Lady Sadie.

        It’s all about staying classy! Not that I’m saying ‘Wooo’ isn’t being classy, because she is!! We just have very different views… *laugh*

      • I’m at a total loss to take sides in any of this because it’s like I agree with both of you, which seems like a contradiction–cognitive dissonance for sure,

        I’m chalking it up to yin-yang.

        I don’t really know what that is (push-pull) either, but it sounds cool to me and it’s the best I can do.

      • “On computer paleoland I’ll write long blog entries or responses to entries describing the nuances of my thoughts or why person x or y is wrong but IRL I’m much more likely to just look for a common ground or terminate/avoid any excessively passionate discussion, or argue much more diplomatically and tactfully if I argue at all. It’s the illusion of the internet… like road rage… our emotions can go places they just can’t in a natural interpersonal format because of the factor of lack of face to face communication and the emotional feedback second by second.”

        Been saying the same thing in various ways for what, gonna be 20 years soon.

        Amen, Wooo. The Internet and IRL is an important distinction. I’ve even had the opportunity over years to meat people IRL I’ve tangled with on these tubes, and it is never the same. Not even close, really. I always love it. I always, always try to be as gracious and friendly as I ca be, no matter what happened on the tubes.

        But the tubes are important in many, many ways. I think people actually change their thinking and are more open to persuasion because we don’t have as much social overhead to deal with.

      • ladysadie1 says:

        Holy Cow!!! Wooo and Natalie, despite the discord between you two over the connotations behind using the word “obedience” at least we can all be thankful that none of us is this incredibly off the rails:
        http://thescarletwoman.tumblr.com/post/795857012/former-female-kansas-senator-doesnt-think-women-ought
        :) food for thought, ladies!

      • @Lady Sadie.

        My God. There is a huge difference between the submission women choose for themselves, and the submission enforced upon them by legislation.

        The woman is quite insane.

      • SSS and Natalie, before I post a link, how come you’re locked in and consider no other possibilities?

        Let me shock you: women absolutely should not be allowed to vote. Absolutely not. Women should not be allowed to dominate (to keep it within the general context of the thread).

        Can you discern the punchline, though?

      • Let me add something, just to piss you off. Women’s Suffrage was a disaster. An enormous disaster.

      • @Richard
        “how come you’re locked in and consider no other possibilities?”

        Locked into what, exactly? The paradigm of women having either all of the control or none of it?

      • Natalie

        Think a little deeper. You are still locked in, binary.

      • Oh, yes. Ok. I see what you mean.

        I do indeed seem to have gone from one extreme to the other – from ball-buster, to bending reed. Having said that however, Wooo wanted to paint me as yet ANOTHER extreme, the vapid, stupid, opressed slave. I’m all of those and none of those. I can assure you that my ‘IRL’ personality is more nuanced. As are my political views – I can argue just as vehemently for suffrage as against it, so your assertion, Richard, that suffrage was a disasterous move doesn’t offend me. I think in many ways it was – it puts me in mind of Bowie’s Suffragette City and not being able to afford the ticket back. I’ve read that American industrialists supported suffrage so women could vote, influence politics, get to work, and be taxed. More money for them! Women in the work force has also caused inflation, as we no longer have to rely on one single income to afford life. Women have gone from a position of not being allowed to work, to having the choice, to having to work. That doesn’t seem like freedom to me. Having said that, just try to take my right to vote and work off me. Go on. Seriously. Try. Fabricati diem, pvnk.

        Words on a page can never describe who I am or my thought processes. Those are learned through spending time with people, and having everything from heated arguments to drunken, pointless and random ‘I LOVE YOU MAN!’ conversations.

        I am free to choose to be as rebellious or obediant as I choose, and so choose the submissive path as it suits my personality and gets me closer to the life and things I want. Try taking my freedom to choose from me and I’ll fight. That’s why I love this blog. It’s about individual freedoms, personal work, and anarchy. All ideals I support. Of course I’m just as likely to change my mind on any topic once I recieve new information, nor do I accept my own opinions as dogma, as I know that ultimately, opinions mean nothing and we can derive no rights from them.

        So really, although my argument does indeed seem entirely binary, my real self is as fluid as water.

      • Wooo

        “by the hard work of women’s suffrage”

        Do you know what? I’ve seen children fully engaged, working hard, to make mud pies. I encourage you to look into sound critiques of Marx’s LTV.

        Another question. How come you’re so certain men weren’t completely fucked up? Are you admitting they had the total path nailed, or did you just want your seat at the table?

      • I see what you did there. Nobody should vote right?

        Dominating is fine as long as those being dominated are cool with it.

      • Johnw

        Shush. You’re spoiling the fun.

      • There is a great essay called “How the Co-dependency Movement
        Is Ruining Marriages”
        by Willard F. Harley, Jr.
        http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi8110_cod.html
        That might lend a good perspective to this debate.

    • “What happens if I’m one of those women you described – a Paleo woman who’s suspicious of modern feminism, and hates the deal that feminism has given us”

      I’m going to answer you, taking the risk of not reading beyond this point.

      You get my unequivocal support, that’s what happens. People think I’m making fun of fat. I’m not. I want to help those who want help. It’s why I do this. I love every success. What offends me is that you don’t have men going around talking about fat acceptance, or don’t criticize fatness, or whatever. It’s only women, and it’s bad feminism that causes it.

      There is a healthy part of it. I agree that the pressure to be ripped is wrong. Marylyn Monroe looked and had the body comp Marylyn Monroe was supposed to have, for example. Many, many women feel better at a body fat of 25% than 10-15. It’s also individual, and age related and hormonal related as well.

      Now I’ll read the rest of your comment.

      • “What offends me is that you don’t have men going around talking about fat acceptance, or don’t criticize fatness, or whatever. It’s only women, and it’s bad feminism that causes it.”

        Mother Nature’s nastiest trick: women *crave* acceptance and love — and men can’t give it (‘naturally”) to women who do not suit them biologically (fat women, disabled women, old women). That is SOOOOO unfair (and painful). It’s also real and natural. Men don’t talk about fat acceptance because it’s not a metric they think about and then take on (any more than homosexuality is a “choice”), it’s a metric they naturally have. Men are built to, and so naturally do, judge mainly on appearance. Women, not-so-much. (Well, nowadays, in this pathological masculinized-women and feminized / juvenile-ized males — women often do…)

        Women, (starting in toddler-hood, so, this isn’t “cultural”) whose *nature* includes shunning and befriending (as social control and safety), *feel* that (male and female) disdain as shunning (for so it is), and because appearance is not a metric high in women’s estimation, they think it’s wrong / bad / childish to”judge” people by their weight. (Do y’all *get* that for (most) men to be sexually excited by an overweight women is not ‘natural’? They may love and adore their woman, and enjoy and desire sex with her, but it’s because other motives(including love) outweigh (ha.) her weight/appearance.)

        (I, like so many, have a jaundiced and wistful attitude about the ever-increasing “desire” (however unnatural) for thinner and thinner women. I look back at cultures and ages where a fat woman WAS desirable — for she was healthy and could make babies. I wouldn’t willingly go back to then, but we moderns, men and women both, have had our “eye” trained/contaminated by the media around us. “Reubenesque” didn’t used to be a code-word for fat lady; it came from paintings of quite large women, who were *perceived* as very attractive. (See? More unfairness… Let’s blame men! {eye roll})

        Life isn’t fair. Blaming men for not being women (or for just being different!) is pretty stupid. It’s not much of a consolation, once you come to realize how different we are from each other — but it IS a consolation, and it allows us to forming solid long-lasting relationships built on the understanding and acknowledgement that those differences are not personal failings — in either direction!

      • “any more than homosexuality is a “choice””

        I’ve always looked at that debate — biological or chosen — and asked myself, how come it can’t be BOTH, depending on individual. On the one side, it’s laughable to look at the appearance and mannerisms of many/most gay men and conclude anything else but that it’s biological. The existence of hermaphrodites in humans, to me, proves nature can pretty much create anything on the spectrum, including pure bisexuals (like my male dog-he likes everything).

        But I also think there are some males who simply choose it as a lifestyle, given all the flash and style and Hollywood surrounding it all.

    • Now I’ve read the rest of it Natalie, I agree 10o% and am happy for you. Sounds to me like you have the incentive to be on an improvement track, not whining that you’re not “accepted” for who you are even though ironically, your more accepted by those you wish to be accepted by than ever.

      Sounds like you found your formula, girl. You go.

      • Thank you, Richard! That means a lot!

      • A.B. Dada says:

        I’m a contrarian, naturally. I used to be condemned for even thinking outside the norm, well before my actual opinion was settled.

        I changed, for the better, after recovering from my own personal irresponsibility that led to my obesity and drop in masculinity.

        Now, I boldly provide a counterpoint, a contrarian point, that is ever bit acerbic as the common wisdom. Why? Because god damn it, someone has to. The average person treats obese people worse, but then they cling to the company line in fear of being outside common norms, rather than speaking up.

        The feminist-Marxists are now shoving “fat acceptance” into the world. It’s all over Facebook, it’s all over real life. I don’t accept it. Obama has made your health care my financial responsibility, and I am going to be outspoken about it.

        If I see a fat person eating donuts, you better believe I’ll speak up. I have to pay for their irresponsibility. I have the right to dictate to those that I pay for. Government just made that decision for me.

        On the other hand, if I see a fat person eating real food, going out of their way to order “no bun” or “can I substitute the pasta?”” I always thank them. I go out of my way to compliment those who are working hard to make a personal change for the better.

        But I will not accept fat acceptance. I will take the contrarian route of fat shaming. I was fat, and not one of my friends or family spoke up. They were too plugged-in to say anything. My balls shrank up and I became a white knighting schlub. None of my guy friends spoke up.

        I’m an asshole, and I won’t apologize for it. But the masses forcing me to support idiotic law are bigger ones. Someone needs to speak up and show the world that there’s nothing illegal or immoral about thinking against the common wisdom. I’m happy to carry that torch, near that cross.

        The average woman’s dress size is 14, has been since about 2008. That’s creeping up to size 16. Fat acceptance is saying “you’re beautiful” while they back door your health care costs onto me. I refuse.

        I’m glad you’re working on your weight, you’ll see doors open for you, average people on the street will treat you better, if you’re single your dating market will flourish and if you’re married there’ll be a big change in how your husband treats you. Keep on it, don’t lose hope. My comments against the obese are against the ones who are stuffing their maws with donuts, not you.

        I appreciate your perspective, and I will make some changes in my target audience by specifying “obese and unwilling to change” and mentioning “obese and taking matters into their own hands.”

        One word doesn’t cover these two disparate groups.

      • “If I see a fat person eating donuts, you better believe I’ll speak up.  I have to pay for their irresponsibility.  I have the right to dictate to those that I pay for.  Government just made that decision for me.”

        Straight up and I’ve been saying it for years, and it goes for the scool lunch post. If you are forced to pay for it and won’t go to jail for saying it, then that is the absolute logic of divisive politics. Say it. Shout it. Embarrass and shame them.

        Somebody has to do it and I might find myself joining.

      • And AD, see the top of the blog. You are referenced.

      • AD, can you provide an example on how you would call a fatty out on eating something less than healthy?

        I’m an untactfully direct dick by nature. However, I don’t want to completely isolate myself from those I’m around by saying, “Hey, you realize that stuffing your face with that shit makes you waddle like a big fucking duck? And how the fuck do you even have sex looking like a beached whale? My dick would have died long ago being with you.” That’s the type of shit that comes to my mind when I see these obese people.

      • Tod

        Let me chime in and say I don’t think that’s the right approach. The right approach is to clearly identify the problem: now that you’ve forced me to pay for your health care I get to tell you what to do.

      • I realize that. I’m asking what would you say to these people?

        By the way, my name has two D’s in it, you cunt.

      • I realized after I posted it that I left off a d. Was going to correct it, but that would have cost more than being called a cunt. So we’re cool, even now, right?

        I’m not sure I’d do this myself now to a stranger, but if I did it might be something as simple as “you know we all have to pay for your health care now, right? Right? Get it?”

      • What if you see a thin person eating donuts? Does that pass muster? What if they have high cholesterol? Will you shame the doughnut-scarfing thinny then? What if they’re a type I or II diabetic? What if the fatty has normal cholesterol and blood pressure levels? Can they have a shame-free donut then? What if they’ve been to the gym four times that week and dammit they just want a doughnut?

        So many questions, so many mitigating circumstances…

      • “What if you see a thin person eating donuts?”

        Natalie. Now, you may not being explicitly disobedient, but surely you understand that this is disobedience in spirit. We had a good thing going here, all was in agreement, on track, congruent.

        And you go and be disobedient on us guys?

        Shame. Does your husband do spankings by proxy?

      • @Richard.

        *laugh*

        Damn, I seem to have broken free of my ‘mindless drone doing tricks for male attention’ programming. I’ll tell my man, and see if we can’t get a good ol’ fashioned buttock-tanning going. Perhaps if we get my backside red enough we can do BBQ! Bring rump steak. Hehehhehehe

      • Natalie, I’m not exactly talking about complete strangers. I did mention in my initial post, “those I’m around” implying people I’m familiar/acquainted with. If that wasn’t clear, I apologize.

        I know the regular habits and tendancies of people at work, school, etc that I see on a fairly regular basis. It’s the ones who are frequently eating in a mindless fashion that I’m talking about.

      • Richard, we were never uncool. :)

        And I like how you phrased what you said. It has enough bite without being full on dickhead.

      • “I’m an asshole, and I won’t apologize for it. ”

        Oh dada, I’m not sure I see a difference (or enough of a difference) between, “I accepted shaming (by myself and esp. others), abandoned myself, and became fat-and-useless” and “I am now dedicated to shaming OTHERS.” What pulled you out of your ‘beaten-down’ self? Someone going all drill-sergeant on your ass and tearing you down? Did you KNOW how to eat better and choose not to? Did you go from crap-food to healthywholegrains and lubricants because you knew nothing at all different from your milieu? How did you find the first step onto the paleo /primal / low carb pathway? By someone shaming you?

        Yes, fat folks eatin’ doughnuts *should* (and most assuredly do) know better. How many of them have just given up? How many of them have tried and failed (many, many times!) at the ‘C.W.’ of how to eat healthily? Do you think SHAMING them will help (help how)? (Do you really think they are not already heartily ashamed of themselves to begin with? Will piling on more shame change their burden of shame? If someone is lying injured under a heap of rocks, do you think throwing MORE rocks on top will help them get up?!)

        Am I making excuses for them? No, actually, I’m not. But I am questioning your “technique for change.” I actually carry around business cards I made up that list (URLS for) blogs, books, and(of course) Tom Naughton’s movies (and his clips on YouTube). (Yes, Richard, of course also FTA — with a warning about the swearing! {wink}) Rather than shaming someone already dying of shame, I offer some help, I point towards a path that they might choose to walk — I give them an alternative way of seeing things! (I show them leverage and angles that might help them lift those rocks OFF themselves; I don’t pile more on!)

        But, while you’re reveling in your ‘oooh, I’m so bad’ swearing and attacking and shaming… are you having an effect? Are you having a good effect? Do you think shaming creates more change than supportive help? (NOT govt help — but if you would ‘lead’ folks to a healthier lifestyle (so they quit picking your pocket and offending your eyes), how does shaming do that?

        Yeah, it’s a lot of fun to (act and) feel all macho and bad-ass by swaggering around self-describing as an asshole. (I’d suggest real masculinity doesn’t need swaggering… you’ve said you do it as a *technique* to get readers to your blog… So is your higher purpose to make change in the world or to get eyeballs on the web? Are you a man who leads (by example and exhortation), or a salesman trying to get buyers (by creating a ruckus)?

        Please, ‘hear’ me clearly: I’m not insulting or necessarily disagreeing with some of your points. I’m … “framing a meta discussion.” HOW are you communicating what you’re communicating, and to what purpose? Is the purpose you’re intending the one you’re achieving?

        Oh — and to you and Richard both — I’d just ask:
        “If I see a fat person eating donuts, you better believe I’ll speak up. I have to pay for their irresponsibility. I have the right to dictate to those that I pay for.”

        You’re annoyed at paying for someone else’s health care?

        Are you out there shaming statin users? If you see someone in a restaurant ‘eating’ a statin — will you jump on him too? Will you point out that he is costing you WAY more than that doughnut eater? How about the skinny-fat person eating a doughnut? Goin’ after her? The diabetic who is not overweight scarfing down that half a pizza or the kid with the 64-oz soda?

        (I was awakened too early this morning by some charity calling, and when I said Michael had died, the young woman got yakking on (and on and on) about her (76-yr-old) mom struggling to adjust, cause her (82-yr-old) dad died in Jan. And how he had had a heart attack and her mom kept it from getting worse by making him take an aspirin and how, afterwards, she fed him all the right stuff– no red meat and al those healthywholegrains and all that crap…

        *IF* I had not been (half-asleep and) annoyed at the early hour and had been motivated to try, once more, to make a change in the world — I might have introduced this young woman to the concepts of primal / paleo. (As it was, I recognized her need to rabbit on and on, and so I half-listened and made sympathetic noises.) How, had I been motivated, might I have had a better chance at making change — SHAMING her (and her mother) for not knowing about the right way to feed and care for her father/husband, for following the (wrong) advice of the doctor(so) who saved his life? Or asking her to look into this nutritional byway that turns out to be the right path?

        Before you take joy in attacking targets, maybe make sure it’s the RIGHT target? And make sure it’s “attack” that’s needed, and not a helping hand?

      • “something as simple as “you know we all have to pay for your health care now, right?””

        Ha. I wish!

        I’m suddenly facing $7,000+ in medical bills for last weeks’ stupid-damned kidney stone. (That’s just the ER visit — no follow-up or anything. Thankfully, with the lovely strong drugs, I passed it.) No one is paying for MY health care now, except me! If I WERE an illegal, I’d get paid-for-by-others health care. But I’m a white American who owns a house and a business that I’m trying to keep afloat — so, there will be no ‘writing off’ my medical care costs! And the medical world absolutely socks it to the uninsured — no nice negotiated-below-cost fees for me! *I* get to make it up for the insured — and the illegals!

        It’s loads of fun to imagine ‘taking it out’ on some fat person — is it honorable?

    • “The great thing about being a free independent human being is you don’t have to default to these binary characters of “hard nosed masculine butch miserable bitcH” or “submissive woman child-in need of male support and assistance for all tasks.”

      I’d award you an Andrea Dworkin Commemorative Edition Pink Cock Ring too but I’m in a chuvanist mood today and only the guys get the tricks.

      (you nailed it there, though)

    • Wooo wrote: “Having a brain and knowing things and being outspoken/assertive or having skills isn’t incompatible with being attractive and mindful of your appearance and the ability to be charming.”

      But feminism (= socialism = communism = destruction) demands that women BE aggressive and masculine (and often, defensive and hostile) about having those skills (and even “let it all hang out: in our actions, appearance, and lack-of-grace). Men are still not supposed to be outspoken and assertive around women (cause they hurt women’s feelings — even in the workplace, where such delicacy has no place!), but women (say they) want to be treated “equally.” Women are supposed to be on the lookout for ANY hint (whether actual or otherwise) that any man (or other woman) is not “seeing them as equal” — whether or not they are equal.

      If we were “equal” — as feminism demands of us — then women wouldn’t be made uncomfortable by Richard (for example) being … less than delicate … around us. We’d BE masculine/equal in ‘taking it’ — and not just in dishing it out! When Sean and Richard bark and snap at each other — THEY don’t get their feelings caught up it.

      If you want (if one want) to be “treated like a lady,” then you must accept the restrictions that apply to a lady. If you want the “freedoms” of a man, you must give up the protections of a lady. If you want to swear, spit, chew, and screw “like a man,” then you don’t get to have your feelings protected from the coarseness of Richard and his peers. (Not, Richard, that I am necessarily identifying any of your commenters as your peers! {wink}) I may wince and disapprove of the coarseness here, but there is so much value despite the presentation, that I will continue to hang around.

      Perhaps, to you, Wooo, being (appearing) feminine and acting charming and polite is natural — for many, many of us who were raised “angry feminist,” it is a HUGE break with our view of how we’re supposed to be in the world! The whole “accept (love) me as I am” (or rather, “as I think I am”!) thing is flawed. Men are NOT attracted to fat women. (I may hate Bill Maher, but he’s right about that!) (And please, the exceptions to the rule merely prove it… Go look up what that use of the word “prove” means, it’s not what you think!)

      That dislike hurts, that lack of desire makes women defensive, and sad, and depressed and and and… {shrug} Welcome to reality. I am a “huge” woman (of which I’m sure Richard was aware in his comments to me). I cannot be sexually attractive (at this time), but I can be charming, and respectful, and dress and look as nice as I can — and NOT let my entirely reasonable dismay that I am not attractive rule how I interact. I am a fantastic, smart, wonderful woman; and any man who comes to love me will do so *despite* my size (or in hope of my weight loss, which is slow because of thyroid and meno and etc. — I’m down 60 pounds, but that’s NOT enough. Oops, sorry ’bout the whining…)

      I WISH “the world of men” would love me like my daddy did, but they won’t. Throwing a tantrum and being bitchy towards men won’t change that. Not even realizing we’re being (inappropriately) bitchy towards men is so common as to be un-noticeable.

      Wooo wrote: “The world is never going to unanimously accept or love or like you, so you better get used to yourself and live for yourself ANYWAY.”

      But for those of us who wish to be ‘mated’ — all the self-love in the world will not make a man want us. Self-love (self-adoration?) is great. Self- (and reality-based-) knowledge is better. Knowing how to interact with the world from a graceful self-love, and not a hurt and angry bitterness won’t change reality, but it may go a lot further in dealing with it.

      • “That dislike hurts, that lack of desire makes women defensive, and sad, and depressed and and and… {shrug} Welcome to reality. I am a “huge” woman (of which I’m sure Richard was aware in his comments to me).”

        I used the word “huge” very purposely, and it had nothing whatever to do with whatever your body composition is.

      • Thank you. I recognized your use (and am quite flattered); nevertheless, it’s still true. My ‘body composition’ still keeps men away (not that I’m ready for any to approach, yet {sigh}). Had Michael not fallen (a bit obsessively) “madly” in love with me sight-unseen over our email conversations, I think he would not have fallen in love — or certainly not spent the time to find my worth to him. But, because we came to know each other through emails, he was able to write this:
        ============
        “El, as I have seen our relationship, I was, first, concerned about you — then quickly fell in love with the femininity with which you think and express yourself — and, wanting you to love me, saw that I could gently let you fall in love with me, tease and flirt with me, while occasionally responding in kind — giving you a chance to “practice” falling in love again, with someone who genuinely loved you in the sense of being attracted to, and delighted by, a woman’s personality and caring for her affectionately. I said earlier that, whether or not there was an erotic attraction between us, I love you for yourself.”

        But he wrote this ‘surrounding’ that:
        ================
        Am I revealing too much?

        As I mentioned in my “breast-beating” message of many days ago, “I am a father’s son with a vengeance.” That means, in sexual terms, that, unlike the “momma’s boy” who expects to love and be loved by women (based on his experience with his mother) the “father’s son” relates to men in doing “manly” things. So his *fundamental* idea of a “romantic interlude” is rape and pillage in a conquered village. In a disciplined military / civilizational environment, the “Code” and its chivalry restrain and transmute this impulse into refined sado-masochistic impulses and fantasies. In the “real” world of sexual encounter, the “father’s son” is confronted with having no idea what women’s own sexual desires are [in rape, they aren't important] — he has no idea why a woman would find himself or any man sexually desirable [again, not necessary]. To a “father’s son,” his own body and mind are just tools and weapons, he has virtually no narcissistic impulses (as heavily characterize homosexuals). For him, sex and violence are nearly the same — as sex and love are for women. “Love” for the father’s son is affection, caring, and concern for the other, a sacrifice of impulse. Combining sex and love makes him shy and tentative, willing to be shown by a woman what she wants. He is amazed and grateful that she wants him, and so is anxious to please her in return. But his anxiety runs counter to the biological dictate of “seize / crush / dominate” upon which his “performance” depends. In a “civilized” context, he tends either to be a faithful companion and husband — or a criminal — because he either subordinates sexual activity to other concerns — or gives vent to his impulse. …

        El, as I have seen our relationship, I was, first, concerned about you — then quickly fell in love with the femininity with which you think and express yourself — and, wanting you to love me, saw that I could gently let you fall in love with me, tease and flirt with me, while occasionally responding in kind — giving you a chance to “practice” falling in love again, with someone who genuinely loved you in the sense of being attracted to, and delighted by, a woman’s personality and caring for her affectionately. I said earlier that, whether or not there was an erotic attraction between us, I love you for yourself.

        As you know, men are *heavily* oriented to the visual in their sexual response, so much so that they are largely indifferent to questions of sentimental attachment to the “sex object.” This is, of course, most characteristic of “father’s sons,” who, as we’ve shown above, are rapists at heart. Personally, I don’t need to do that to “get off” — I’m sensationally aroused by very full, well-rounded hips and thighs, flaring out from under a bustier (I have no “performance anxiety” whatever when confronted with that). A “super model” looks like a boy in drag to me — the typical “runway” model resembles a resurrected corpse. To me, a healthy and desirable woman of your height would ideally weigh about 160 lbs. I say that in all humility, because I need to hit the gym to get *myself* back in shape.

        So there you have *my* soul bared to you. [Are you disappointed? Horrified?]
        ====================

        Bet that’ll shock the ladies! {shrug} If we women don’t come to see how ‘foreign” men are to us, we’ll always be thinking, believing, and acting as if they (y’all!) are “just like” us and are choosing to “misbehave.” And thus, we’ll always have trouble with how differently they think and act!)

        Michael also said, to Dr. Pat Allen — the guru of our marriage — (before we even married, in a private session when we were working out what he (and I) called “the taming of the feral female”: me!): “Elenor and I are some very unusual people and we have some things that bring us together, but also some very powerful things that cause us to clash.”

        Sorry for the trip(s) down memory lane — but Michael’s openness about how truly foreign men were to my (pathological, liberal-ish, recovering-feminist) idiotic notions was amazing and liberating. No longer was I “weird” (or bad!) for reacting and thinking “like a woman” –cause, uh… you know… I was SUPPOSED to! Then, I could only see men as “bad” and “twisted.” Now, I see y’all as you are and revel in all-y’all’s difference and masculinity!

    • Imo you are being unfair to hambeasts.

      Hambeasts are people too.

    • It’s the woo – you suppose a lot about me in that comment above. Firstly, I’m not offended by swearing I just choose not to do it myself because I don’t believe it becomes me.

      “Instead of wearing some random personality like a mask, why don’t you search inside of yourself and figure out who you are and what you want?”

      I did exactly that. Weren’t you reading?

      As for your deductive reasoning regarding masculinity/femininity/my question regarding fatness/my identity/stability/how offended I am – I’m not touching those, except to say I’m happy. It sounds like you’re not if you want to take me to task over my opinions, rather than just accept I hold them. I wish you all the luck in the world.

    • sexy bear friend says:

      Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!!! Wooo, I am def going to your blog. I never write, but after reading your comments, I felt that I had to show some support — that you speak for people that appreciate your voice. THANK-YOU!!! Most viewers do NOT comment — the comments section makes up such a small portion of the readership of any blog and they tend to represent the extremes. Yet these extreme commenters seem to drive (or enable) the worst in the blog writer, esp if they deal primarily in emotionalism like Richard does. I would not be surprised if you reflect the opinions of the majority of FTA readers (or, as me, former readers. Richard, come back from the deep end!). So thank you again for being a smart, balanced counter-point to some of this rediculousness (sic). Freedom through slavery, ladies? I’ve dealt with true men’s men my entire life (and I do love THESE guys). I’ve seen how these guys (blue collar outdoorsmen, athletes, farmers, etc) felt about men who had to brag about being “alpha” — they saw you for the fraud’s you are. White collar work? Psshaw! Never! Use your hands! Have something to SHOW for your labors. Whether I agree with that or not is immaterial. That’s how they feel. And guess what? They never shy away from strong women. But that’s because they don’t mistake “strong” with “asshole”, either.
      And Richard, while I’m here, could you elaborate on a comment you made in a previous post (or a previous post’s comment) something to the effect of it being natural for men to dominate women. What did you mean — that it’s just always natural, or in the past it had been “natural”. Please elaborate that point.
      PS: I’m a woman. “Bear” refers to my husband and I’s nickname for each other. I googled it the other day and realized that it’s also related to gay porn.

      • Hi sexy bear friend.

        First, I can catch fish, shoot birds in flight, shoot or trap ground dwelling animals, dress them all, cook them up. I can lay tile, run electrical, plumbing, HVAC, do all carpentry but cabinetry (lack of specialized tools), reroof a house, paint it inside & out, replace an engine in a pre-80s car, fly airplanes, sailplanes and hang gliders, con a 10,000 tonne ship in open sea and in & out of port. And I can run a complex company.

        Did I leave anything out?

        The domination is natural because, just as when you install an electrical outlet in your home, there is a male side and a female side, one physically goes into the space of the other, the “dominant” side. I’m talking about the pure existential physicality of it.

        Or, it’s almost impossible for a female to rape a male, if you care to think of that in analogical terms.

        There’s a pure physical side of the domination of male over female. That’s the given. We have minds, though, and emotions. It need not be more than that it terms of relationship, unless the two parties mutually consent to non harmful play in that context.

      • BRAVO Richard!

        (Okay, one more memory-lane trip: as I was resisting and struggling against the idea of “subordinating” myself (to a MAN?! EEK!) and beginning to oh-so-slowly recognize my own feelings, Michael wrote:
        ===============
        My Darling, ask yourself what I have “done” to “master” you? It seems that I am your master simply by “being.” You seem to sense my confidence, my composure, my gentle disposition toward you — all of which speak subtly to your intellect and emotions of reserves of power that need not be impressed upon you. Evidently, there is nothing you can “do” to resist me. Can you talk yourself into disbelieving what you have found to be true? Could you convincingly pretend that I don’t exist?
        ===============
        and
        ===============
        But it appears that I needn’t lift a finger to “master” you — your own instincts are subjecting you to me. If I “tried” to master you, I would be thwarting the work of your own subconscious desires.
        ===============

        I had written to him:
        ===============
        I envision, maybe you can tell me how you feel about it, that {blush} overcoming my resistance to being mastered would be something you would like. I do not ever imagine just giving up and becoming a milquetoast (can women be that?). I have been struggling with my desire to subordinate myself to you and my desire to stay free and independent and to not be mastered. (I think) that struggle would be (is!) part of my ‘fight against’ you — the attraction and fear.

        Here’s another word picture: were I to become a ‘captive in your castle,’ having *chosen* to be there, I would still be pacing the halls, looking for the gate out. I would still be resisting your ‘ownership’ of me, my body, my life. Even while I was choosing to be a prisoner, I would not be giving up my desire to be free. I don’t think it’s a permanent (i.e., binary) choice — I think I would not become a ‘slave,’ merely because I’d been ‘captured’ (or rather, had given myself into captivity) (Hey, once a princess, always a princess — even in captivity.) The king may rule, but the captive doesn’t have to surrender. And the fight’s not against the king, it’s against the captivity. The king is the symbol of captivity, and is the ‘force’ against which the princess fights for her freedom, even knowing it’s a hopeless battle because of the king’s strength. (And even having chosen to give herself into that captivity, to that king.) Does that make sense?
        ===================

        It may sound stupid to write this: but once you find the man who IS your mate, he will be someone you look up to, someone you wish to take the ‘second chair’ to, you will ‘naturally’ wish to take that position. (Yes, yes, 1/3 of women want to be the masculine energy in a relationship; I’m not writing to/about those; I’m writing of the 2/3 who wish to be the feminine energy.)

        (All by way of saying: Richard, I agree completely: “The domination is natural.” As in Nature, as in biological, which we CAN overcome to some degree (lawsuits, social pressures, snarling and biting), but which we can never escape altogether.

      • This is so… fascinating to me. I’ve been happily unmarried to my fella for 16 years now – he’s most definitely my mate. However, I’ve never felt the urge to take ‘second chair’ to him, to ‘naturally’ take any position other than just being who I am. I’ve never even thought in those terms. Nor have I thought about wanting to be the ‘masculine energy’ or about defining myself according to my gender – it’s completely foreign to me, and therefore very interesting, that some people do think this way. Appreciate the interesting discussion!

  10. “Cookbooks are mostly for betas.”

    Important qualifier that “mostly”. Cooking “by the book” is indeed weak once you know what you’re doing. Even for the skilled cook, though, books can serve as a repository of ideas people have had about cooking and dishes that serve as a springboard for creative culinary minds like yours. One might learn about chicken/tarragon/lemon as a kid watching a parent cook, for instance, but a cookbook can inspire the cook with new approaches to combine the three.

    Perhaps cookbooks are the thesis, drunken refrigerator raiding the antithesis, and cooking strategies like yours above the synthesis?

    • “Perhaps cookbooks are the thesis, drunken refrigerator raiding the antithesis, and cooking strategies like yours above the synthesis?”

      Ha, yea. People should hopefully see the intentional hyperbole there. I do have cookbooks myself, in fact a nice collection of old classic ones, including the first one published in America. I never use them to follow a single recipe. I use them for ideas. Mostly I use the Internet so I’ll scan six recipes, get some ideas, go for it. Usually though, over 90% of what I do is straight just getting in and doing stuff.

      • I use cookbooks for a marker. Often, I will hear of someone blabbering on about this great great dish they had (pho, for example). Instead of going out to a restaurant I will dig into the backstory about the dish and then grab a recipe and execute it exactly. Then I can go about messing with things in a manner more pleasing to The Great Jscott and the people(s) within my circle.

      • “in a manner more pleasing to The Great Jscott”

        There can be only one!

  11. I was dating a girl a few years ago who totally winged it in the kitchen. She came up with some great dishes, but her reductions were to die for. My reductions (few attempted before her) were largely failures because I would try to follow the cookbook recipe to a T. She taught me the ART behind making a damn good reduction. It didn’t hurt that she cooked in panties and an old, tight tee either. Ah, fond memories.

    Cookbooks are good for generating ideas, but the best things I have made were always created on a whim.

  12. The alpha/beta thing isn’t to be taken literally as it applies to humans on account of the methods most animals use to determine status are illegal among humans and in any event would consume too much of our time, it would be impossible to hold a job for longer than two days.

    • “The alpha/beta thing isn’t to be taken literally”

      You too win an Andrea Dworkin Commemorative Edition Pink Cock Ring.

      I’ll get more into this in the next post. Short preview: it’s a spectrum, 4 sides of the same coin for men/women, etc.

  13. wow. I just started a paleo journey, being 3 months post-partum, and had marked this blog as one to check for info and inspiration. I will be unchecking it right away. Don’t know how much harder you could try to alienate larger women who are attempting to change their lives than to mock their size 16 panties. I don’t even know what this post tomorrow will be about but I shudder to think, what with the comments about “being feminine and demure”. You know what? I’m feminine and a total bad ass, a feminist who loves being at home and doing domestic stuff. It is possible.

    The defense of “oh he’s just joking” is the type of defense people trot out when they make other jokes in ill taste, about people with disabilities, race, and rape. Nope, not going to accept that. Man, I NEVER write on comments on the internet because I know there’s just about no point to it, but this was so unexpected and so just . . . I mean, come on.

    • dvgray

      Sorry to be a dissapointment to you. Hope you find something more suitable to your tastes. This is an anarchistic blog and as such, everything happens here. We seek synthesis, over time.

  14. LeonRover says:

    Well Rich,

    You got quite a few fishies to rise to your Bait . . . .

    Oh, you MasterBaiter, you.

    Slainte

    • LR

      It’s so much better and elegant when it’s you that points out the obvious, rather than me.

      Surprised to see Sean go for it so early though. But anyone can have a bad day and besides, I owe him one for misconstruing one his comments the other day anyway and making him feel othered.

  15. Props for the Andrea Dworkin reference

    • Someone mentioned in comments a few days back that a certain debutante “feminist” had never heard of Dworkin, or Camile Paglia for that matter. I mean, what is this, some sort of neo-feminism where the insanity of the past isn’t even accounted for and all the insanity has to be relived?

      What’s next? All sexual intercourse is rape? BTDT

  16. Mind Blown says:

    I stopped reading FTA around the time you ran out of material and started posting youtube videos of songs, your childish hackneyed politics, and paleo sociology woo, as it was clearly going downhill rapidly because you couldn’t handle your success.

    To see it’s turned into yet another gossip forum where you whine about petty personal problems between people in the community instead of the actual topic the community was created around is priceless.

    A 50 year old man who was himself a gigantic fatass 3 years ago complaining about “fat chicks” and “old chicks” and “size 16 panties” is icing on the cake.

    No one is taking the alpha thing seriously from you with your goofy creaky voice inbred features baggy eyes & saggy hound-dog face, I know libertarians are mostly in it for the weed but do you seriously think you’re attractive?

    Announcing you’re writing a book about being “a backdoor man” because women are repulsed by you [redacted - Ed].

    Where are all these other super dominant alpha men who rave incessantly about their own “F-bomb”‘s? Oh sooo naughty someone said fuck on the internet, he can even call everyone a cunt! Wow, what a rebel.

    The exact same thing is happening to every once interesting online community like atheism, paleo, reddit, skepticism, etc:

    All of the leading venues for learning and discussion degenerate into a gossip festival about the people in the community instead of the actual topic of the community, the women complain about being sexually harassed and pervasive degradation, & the men tell them they’re going to rape them if they don’t shut the fuck up and stop being cunts.

    Bravo, idiots.

    • “I stopped reading FTA….”

      Priceless. You sure seem well informed for someone who doesn’t read here, and I’ve been putting up youtubes of rock music since years ago.

      Admit it. You just can’t help yourself. As a hater of me, you probably read it more than the average, just to see what I’ll say or do next.

      I did redacted the comment about my wife, and you’re in the moderation queue for it as well.

    • Mind blown,

      You are doing it wrong.

      Love you mean it,
      Head Sprung

  17. Richard, how can I be an alpha male like you?

    • Nos:

      As you’ll see from the post I’m drafting now, probably very few human beings are completely alpha and dominant, very few beta and demurring or submissive. It’s a distribution. Has Wooo very astutely pointed out, it’s not binary. A distribution. There are extremes, but most people are some mix of both, and also in different contexts.

      And it applies to women as well.

      I think the best thing is to pursue your values, develop a better, more rational sense of values, and only trade them away for that which gives you a better calculus on greater happiness for longer term.

      • Basic game theory bears repeating here. You make it sound like “alpha” and “beta” are opposite ends of the same one-dimensional scale, when they’re actually two separate qualities of mate value.

        “Beta” doesn’t mean demurring and submissive. It refers to the comforting stable provider qualities that are just as important as alpha qualities in judging a man’s value. Not enough alpha = submissive, boring, unassertive. Not enough beta = can’t hold a job, incompetent around the house, etc. Sadie (or whoever) isn’t looking for someone halfway between alpha and beta. She’s looking for someone who has both and knows when to employ them.

  18. I have often been described as “someone who was probably a really masculine gay guy in her past life.” If I bought that shit, which I don’t, but it’s interesting. While my preferred style of dress is pants and a shirt I’m never mistaken for a guy (must have to do with the boobs). When I look back on my romantic career my main boyfriends (and my one husband) have been betas. I’ve dated so-called alpha males with disastrous results–think of two rams violently butting heads in a meadow somewhere. My husband is not subservient, but we’ve figured out who’s best at what–he’s awesome with finances, I’m the fixer-upper and set-up chick–and work with that. A story I always like to tell is when I was preparing for my wedding in 1998. My gown arrived at the bridal shop, and since where I worked at the time was only a couple of blocks away I ran down at my lunch hour to get the gown pinned for alteration. So I climb into the gown and put the veil on, and I come out into the staging area, the mirror-surrounded platform. I take one look at myself and immediately double over, hysterically laughing. When I calmed down after a while, the shop owner says “I’ve had brides cry in happiness or be mad because the gown didn’t look right, but you”re the first one I’ve seen crack up like that, why?” I look at her, still wiping away tears of laughter, and say “you have to realize that this is TOTALLY NOT ME.” When people see my wedding photos they’re like “OMG YOU’RE SO FUCKING GIRLY THAT IS TOTALLY NOT YOU!” I like men. I like how they look, I like talking to them. I’m in my late forties now, married to a guy who understands how I operate and is cool with it. My self-worth isn’t tangled up in how attractive men find me like it was in my twenties. Can men do shit things? Of course–but so do women. Each sex isn’t the other’s enemy.

    • Trish

      I just laughed. I’ve known guys who couldn’t beat their way out of a wet paper sack with tools (which viscerally disgusts me), and women who just aren’t comfortable being dainty, whom I adore.

      Back in the day, we called ‘em tomboys, but what they were were the most desirable females in many ways if you took time to notice.

      • Another funny story–when we decided to get married my husband and I agreed that he’d do the cleaning (he’s a neat freak) and I’d do the cooking, a breakdown that’s worked well for us these past fourteen years. A few years ago when we were still living in the ‘burbs our next-door neighbor, a nice guy but a hardcore Baptist with very definitive ideas on the roles men and women should play, came over on a Sunday afternoon to return a tool he’d borrowed. He came into our living room to find my husband vacuuming (we have a crapload of cats so the shed hair builds up) and me sprawled on the couch, having a beer and watching a football game. The look of sheer horror on his face made us laugh so hard we cried.

      • Go figure.

        Those social or conditioned differences can be funny.

        I used to love to tell all my commie, leftie gay and lesbian firends over for a nice elegant dinner, when sitting around afterwards and chatting that in out 1000 sq ft loft, I had 5-6 loaded guns, but I’d lost count, and I could get to at least one of them in 3 seconds from anywhere.

        Horror. Most notably, surprise and incongruence, as I’d just put on a dinner party fit for any urbanity anywhere.

        There are many parallels to draw between fear of guns and fear of gay people.

  19. Longtime Reader says:

    Richard, how are the cold baths working?

    It would be great to get back to some posts like that.

    You’ll assume I’m trolling (but I’m not) when I say that the gender stuff is not as interesting as your weight/diet posts. The gender stuff is starting to come off as reactive to Melissa. Being reactive to Melissa is guarantee of dullness, as there is nothing more dull than she is.

    (What’s funny is that, offended by your blog, she recreated it. I don’t think she gets how much like you she is.)

    (Although you had to work for your money. Not very hip of you, sorry.)

    BTW, another issue with the gender posts is they open the floodgates to commenters who are not as interesting as the OP, yet are long-winded egomaniacs.

    Anyway, not sure if you noticed, but Michael Eades posted for the first time in half a year (a very interesting post), but you haven’t mentioned it. Have you read it? He’s at least as compelling as Melissa McEwen’s latest tantrum. Maybe even more.

    It would be good to see you keep covering the beat you took on.

    And although it’s hopelessly un-hip, I like that Eades remains curious about how people over thirty should eat. Probably something he got from decades of helping old fatties get less sick. Poor guy. Doesn’t seem to realize that life is really about how cool you are. Just a washed-up old doc who can’t help his stupid obsession with helping sick people. What a pathetic fetish; what a clown.

    Because God knows that all that matters is how our skinny young blogger friends eat. We eat STARCH, and it’s SAFE. And we DEMAND that only people who AGREE WITH US be permitted to debate the issue.

    Anyway, who cares about the right diet for those old farts, anyway? They’re fucking FAT, for Christ’s sake!

    • LR

      I hear you. I hear all of it. Remember, my friend Mike felt he had to defend himself as concerns AC.

      There’s not much difference. And yes, anyone can check the public SiteMeter stats and there is a decided uptrend over the last few weeks. Wonder why.

      I’m hoping my next post begins to wash out the baloney soon. I do have a number of initiatives going with some of the people who’ve had success, other things, so on.

      BTW, dont discount some moderate starch. I think there’s something there. But I also thing that when you eat starch, eat like an Asian (small protein). When you eat lots of protein, go with veggies. And eat liver and oysters.

      CT is pretty dead in the water, now. Tap is at 80 degrees and I am not going to fuck with ice. I’ll revisit in November or December when the tap is back at sub-50.

      • Wash out that baloney!

        “…another issue with the gender posts is they open the floodgates to commenters who are not as interesting as the OP, yet are long-winded egomaniacs.”

        That sort of reminds me of something that Brad Warner wrote over on his blog:

        “Writing a blog is a lonely job. I really don’t know who’s reading it. For a while it felt like nobody was reading it at all. It almost seems like people were just using the comments section to create their own micro-blogs to tell the world how lame they think I am (then why were they reading?) as well as argue with each other.”

        Not an exact match, but a different manifestation of ego at work.

      • The main thing about commenters over the many years is how very, very few comment regularly for more than a year or so.

        This is the thing people who register admonishments and complaints to me do not understand. I have been here every day for almost 10 years and I know what I am doing.

      • You certainly do keep it fresh and interesting!
        (See article above this one)

Trackbacks

  1. [...] let the cat outta the bag already, though not directly at me in my bait trap I set last night as a prelude to this [...]