30 May 2009

Women Are Like Hand Grenades, by HappyGhost


Happy Ghost was a regular on DGM 2.0. Since DGM was discontinued, he's become a member of the new, MGTOW forum. It was on there that HG posted THIS beauty...


I attended my pal's kid's birthday party today. One of my pal's friends was there, and he has a new girl. They mentioned to this chick that I'm a ghost... didn't use the word, but described the idea. She immediately started questioning me... why?

I mentioned that marriage is a bad risk. She trotted out the "not all girls are like that" line, which I nicely handled with the hand grenade analogy (here's a box of hand grenades, choose one you think is a dud, then hold it and pull the pin and see if you were right or not). There's no way to know WHAT kind of girl you have until you're committed and it's too late to avoid being destroyed. Therefore, there can be women who are "not like that", but unfortunately it's irrelevant. Not all hand grenades are "like that" (meaning they explode), and there ARE duds... but because the duds can look just like the live ones, you'd have to be crazy to pick one and commit to finding out.

She rolled her eyes and basically said that if you don't know the girl by THEN (marriage time), then you're clueless. I replied that women can be master actresses, and you can only get to know the "real them" if they allow you to see it before the wedding, which many do not. And girls acting good look identical, in all respects, to girls who are REALLY good. So, there's just no way to know until it's too late.

I then explained that Marriage 2.0 is far different from Marriage 1.0 (and yes, I did use the numbers, maybe their usage will spread), and that in Marriage 2.0, the woman holds almost all the cards, and the guy holds almost none.

She immediately trotted out the "bitter" shaming tactic, but she did it subtly. "Were you married before?" I said no. "Were you in a relationship that went bad?" I again said no. "Then how do you know all this?" I smiled and said, "By observing all my male friends suffering and being destroyed because of this, and by reading all the changes in marriage and divorce laws over the last 40 years, straight out of the law books, and by watching precedent be set in courtrooms. I learned by observing, instead of by personal experience, thank god."

Silence. "They're not all like that" was blown out of the water. So was "you're just bitter". She had nothing much left in her arsenal.

Then she inquired how long I've been like this, and indicated that surely it's not a sustainable choice. Then my friends told her how long it's been since I dated or had a relationship... which is many, many years now. I grinned right at her, smoking a big cigar, drinking a microbrew, and looking happy as hell with myself and my life. Not sustainable, my ass, dearie.

This seemed to really freak her out. She mentioned how she had a female friend who couldn't find a good man, and complained about it all the time... a single mother! I stayed quiet on that one (didn't want to get too confrontational, after all).

What really seemed to spook her is that her boyfriend was sitting right next to her when I said all this, absorbing this unique perspective of mine (he already knew about me, but she probably didn't know he knew). I'm sure she wasn't too happy with me speaking such ideas with him sitting there, because I'll bet she's going to try to get his head in the marriage noose soon.

That was fun. She asked if I'd ever consider dating and getting married, and I told her that if the social and legal systems reverted to how they used to be in the 1950's and before, when a man had a fair chance at a good marriage and the laws were much more equal, only then would I consider it. Returning to the hand grenade analogy, I said that back then, unwittingly choosing a live one that looked like a dud might've gotten you a badly bruised hand, but today, it destroys you. I then said that I was quite sure that fairness would never be restored in my lifetime, therefore I will simply not participate, and many other men won't, either.

She didn't have a lot to say after that. It was pretty beautiful.

If more of them hear this, while their girlfriends (and perhaps they themselves) are whining about not being able to find a man, perhaps they'll put two and two together.


That's a good analogy, isn't it? A live hand grenade and a dud look exactly alike one another, but you cannot differentiate them without doing damage to yourself. Women are the same way; the bad ones look the same as the good ones do, act like they do, talk like they do, etc. From where we men sit, how can we tell them apart? Well, that's easy; since 99.999999% of the women out there are feminazi skanks, one can operate under the assumption that ALL women are bad, and he'll probably be right! The few women who aren't like that got snapped up years ago, so it's pointless to look for one. Until next time...


24 April 2009

Time for My Commentary & Analysis


You've no doubt heard about Susan Boyle, the old spinster with the lovely voice. On another blog, I read parts of a feminist slanted article analyzing the audience reaction to her; it was the usual whine about how ugly men can do things, while ugly women can't-waaaahhh, waaaahhh, waaaahhhh. When I saw that drivel, I decided it's time for more of MY biting commentary & analysis. Stand by while I rip this drivel apart...


It wasn't singer Susan Boyle who was ugly on Britain's Got Talent so much as our reaction to her

Is Susan Boyle ugly? Or are we? On Saturday night she stood on the stage in Britain's Got Talent; small and rather chubby, with a squashed face, unruly teeth and unkempt hair. She wore a gold lace dress, which made her look like a piece of pork sitting on a doily. Interviewed by Ant and Dec beforehand, she told them that she is unemployed, single, lives with a cat called Pebbles and has never been kissed. Susan then walked out to chatter, giggling, and a long and unpleasant wolf whistle.

I love how Miss Gold (yes, I'm assuming that this 'charming' woman is unmarried-a logical assumption to make, since she's a high profile, feminazi career bitch) just EVISCERATES Miss Boyle, yet she has the cheek (or nerve) to criticize men for their reaction to her?! Come on! Let's see what colorful adjectives Miss Gold...

She says that Miss Boyle's gold lace dress "...made her look like a piece of pork sitting on a doily." Wow, that's rather cutting, wouldn't you say? I don't recall any men saying such things about Susan Boyle; rather, it was a WOMAN who offered the most cutting, most biting criticism of her. A piece of pork sitting on a doily-ouch! And she says that men's reaction to her was ugly?! Come on, Tanya!

Now, as for Susan's prounouncments about being unemployed and never being kissed, let's trash those statements one by one...

How could a woman be unemployed when 82% of job losses thus far in the recession have fallen on men? How could she be unemployed when, as a woman, she could hold her employer hostage with the threat of crying 'discrimination'? I don't see how a woman could be unemployed, unless there are no jobs in her town, which Boyle herself described as a collection of villages.

As for never being kissed, come on! Don't insult our intelligence, Susan! I know she's not the prettiest woman who ever walked the face of the Earth, but she's not the ugliest, either, especially @ 47 years of age; you know damn well she looked better when she was younger! Furthermore, she looked good enough to get some attention from the boys. No, she got kissed all right; she just wasn't kissed by the boys she WANTED kissing her! Susan, please don't tell such a bold faced lie, and Miss Gold, don't be complicit in such a bold faced lie! Please don't insult our intelligence like that...

Whenever a woman cries about having no offers for dates or anything remotely similar, here's what she REALLY means: she's not receiving offers from the men she deems desirable, not that she has a total dearth of offers. You see Fellas, women are the genetic celebrities or rock stars, while men are the genetic groupies. Women don't have to do anything to get men to pay attention to them other than look semi presentable and be semi pleasant-that's it! If a woman has showered in the past week and is anything nicer than a royal bitch, guys will pay attention to her. Men, OTOH, have to do a lot of work just to get female attention. IOW, even your ugly women will get hit on multiple times a day; they may not get hit on as many times a day as her prettier sisters, but she'll get plenty of offers every day nonetheless. The rub is that even the ugly chicks want the most desirable guys; they want the same guys the pretty girls want. So, when when a woman cries about guys not asking her out, you know she's full of shit-end of story. She's just not having the guys (guys that every other woman wants) she wants asking her out; that's what she REALLY means. Don't believe a woman when she says no one wants her; that's got to be the biggest crock of shit I ever heard in my life!

Why are we so shocked when "ugly" women can do things, rather than sitting at home weeping and wishing they were somebody else? Men are allowed to be ugly and talented. Alan Sugar looks like a burst bag of flour. Gordon Ramsay has a dried-up riverbed for a face. Justin Lee Collins looks like Cousin It from The Addams Family. Graham Norton is a baboon in mascara. I could go on. But a woman has to have the bright, empty beauty of a toy - or get off the screen. We don't want to look at you. Except on the news, where you can weep because some awful personal tragedy has befallen you.

Are we shocked when ugly women can do things? I don't think so. Miss Gold pans a bunch of ugly, British men for being successful; other than Sir Alan Sugar, I don't know the others, so my comments will be confined to Sir Alan Sugar.

Mr. Sugar is Britain's answer to our Donald Trump; in fact, he hosts the British version of "The Apprentice". Sir Alan Sugar is a smart, savvy, successful business man. IOW, he's DONE something to deserve notoriety, Miss Gold! He didn't just sit there and look good; he didn't just nurture his inner attention whore like most women do. No, he actually DID something; he did it well; and he was well remunerated for his efforts. You know what I think, Miss Gold? I think you're suffering from a case of penis envy; that's what I think.

You know, if an actress has talent, if she has presence, she WILL find work after she's past her physical prime. Let's look at Barbara Stanwyck as an example. I remember seeing her in "The Thorn Birds" when she was an old woman with white hair. She played the scorned matron, and she did it well. We could look at Ava Gardner or Lauren Bacall; both of them worked well past their primes too. Why? Because they had presence; because they compelled you to watch them, that's why! Actresses who have presence, i.e. they give you a REASON to watch them, will have work. The reason most modern actresses don't work past 40-45 years of age is because all they have is their looks; they don't have that special something that grabs us by the throat and compells us to watch them.

That's why many ugly men can find work on screen-because they're good, Miss Gold! Let's look at actor Joe Spano, shall we? The last role I saw him in was as the NASA director in "Apollo 13", one of my all time favorite movies. Mr. Spano isn't handsome, but he IS a good actor. He's been typecast in similar roles as the elder administrator or official in charge; he realized that he's not going to get starring roles, so he did well with what he was given. What was the result? He got steady work, and as actors go, was successful enough to earn a steady paycheck in an extremely competitive business.

But most women don't know who Joe Spano is. He was never the Hollywood sex symbol; he wasn't the man every woman wanted, so no woman wanted him. Shoot, Brad Pitt, today's modern sex symbol, was IGNORED by women till he made it big! Miss Gold, the reason that ugly men get work on screen when ugly women don't is because the ugly men have talent; they have what it takes to get work, Miss Gold-duh!

Simon Cowell, now buffed to the sheen of an ornamental pebble, asked this strange creature, this alien, how old she was. "I'm nearly 47," she said. Simon rolled his eyes until they threatened to roll out of his head, down the aisle and out into street. "But that's only one side of me," Susan added, and wiggled her hips. The camera cut to the other male judge, Piers Morgan, who winced. Didn't Susan know she was not supposed to be sexual? The audience's reaction was equally disgusting. They giggled with embarrassment, and when Susan said she wanted to be a professional singer, the camera spun to a young girl, who seemed to be at least half mascara.

She gave an "As if!" squeak and smirked. Amanda Holden, the female judge, a woman with improbably raised eyebrows and snail trails of Botox over her perfectly smooth face, chose neutrality. And then Susan sang. She stood with her feet apart, like a Scottish Edith Piaf, and very slowly began to sing Les Miserables' I Dreamed A Dream. It was wonderful.

The judges were astonished. They gasped, they gaped, they clapped. They looked almost ashamed. I was briefly worried that Simon might stab himself with a pencil, and mutter, "Et tu, Piers, for we have wronged Susan in thinking that because she is a munter, she is entirely useless." How could they have misjudged her, they gesticulated. But how could they not? No makeup? Bad teeth? Funny hair? Is she insane, this sad little Scottish spinster, beloved only of Pebbles the Cat?

Simon Cowell was buffed to a sheen? Uh, Miss Gold, he looks the same as he ever did; he's still sporting the same short haircut and same black shirts that he always has. He wasn't buffed to anything, you stupid bitch! Again, I think this is a case of more penis envy; you can't stand it that a man is smarter and more successful than you are. Simon is no nonsense, no bullshit; he lets you know what's what, which is why I like him.

Now, let's see who uses more cutting words and adjectives for Miss Boyle now, shall we? Tanya Gold uses phrases like "this strange creature, this alien" to describe Susan Boyle; those aren't nice things to say now, are they? Again, let us please note that it's a WOMAN saying these things, not a man. It's a woman who is being nasty in her critique of another woman's appearance-what a shocker.

Here are more examples of Miss Gold's cutting commentary. She talks about the young woman (to whom the camera cut immediately before Susan Boyle sang) as being half mascara. Gold describes Amanda Holden, the female judge on the panel, as "a woman with improbably raised eyebrows and snail trails of Botox over her perfectly smooth face". Even though these words are written rather than spoken, you can just feel the contempt oozing from them, can't you? Again, let us note that it's a WOMAN making these harsh critiques, not a man...

As for Simon's reaction, you're exagerating, Miss Gold. Yes, Simon Cowell moved his eyes, but it was diagonally, not vertical, as is the classic rolling of the eyes. His reaction seemed to say to me, "This ought to be good! Let's see what you've got, Lady." Simon didn't roll the eyes, Darlin'.

Miss Gold then goes on to discuss how Susan Boyle TRIED to act sexy, and it didn't work. It wasn't because Miss Boyle didn't know she was supposed to be asexual; it was because that is not part of her persona, Miss Gold! Being a sex kitten is NOT part of who Susan Boyle is; when she tried being a sex kitten, it didn't work. For me, it's as simple as that.

I'm going to take a look at a couple of old school actresses, actresses who have different styles, if you will. If you were to look at Marilyn Monroe or Jayne Mansfield, they OOZED sex appeal; it was part of their being; they could wiggle their hips, and it would be perfectly okay for them to do so. Why? Because it was 'them'.

The other actress I'm going to look at is Patricia Neal. She's been in dozens of movies over the decades. She started working in the early 1950s, and she's still working today! Wait a minute-I thought old ladies weren't SUPPOSED to be working as actresses; I thought they were run off the screen when they hit 40! Sorry, I couldn't help digressing here...

Anyway, Patricia Neal, though she's a fine actress, was never a big star like Marilyn Monroe or Jayne Mansfield; she never had that raw, primal sex appeal that Monroe or Mansfield had. She was a good, solid actress who portrayed your ordinary, average woman well, that's all. If Patricia Neal had tried to wiggle her hips, do the 'come hither' stare, or any other sexy gestures, they would have failed miserably for her. Why? It's not because she was supposed to be asexual; it was because such actions are not part of her persona. It's as simple as that.

The one thing that Tanya Gold is right about is that Susan Boyle did sing wonderfully. I think THAT'S why the judges were in astonishment- because Susan Boyle has a lovely voice. I think that the judges on the show, "You've Got Talent" (which seems to be in the mold of "American Idol") are used to seeing people who've got anything but talent; when they see real talent, they're amazed. IOW, even if Susan Boyle had been a PYT, the judges STILL would have been surprised. Why? It's not because ugly people aren't supposed to have talent; it's because the talent Susan Boyle showed is so rare.

When Susan had finished singing, and Piers had finished gasping, he said this. It was a comment of incredible spite. "When you stood there with that cheeky grin and said, 'I want to be like Elaine Paige', everyone was laughing at you. No one is laughing now." And it was over to Amanda Holden, a woman most notable for playing a psychotic hairdresser in the Manchester hair-extensions saga Cutting It. "I am so thrilled," said Amanda, "because I know that everybody was against you." "Everybody was against you," she said, as if Susan might have been hanged for her presumption. Why? Can't "ugly" people dream, you flat-packed, hair-ironed, over-plucked monstrous fool?

The reason why people were laughing when Susan Boyle said that she wanted to be like Elaine Paige had little, if anything, to do with her looks. Why? Elaine Paige is a supremely talented actress and singer over in Britain. She's most noted for her work in musicals such as "Cats". Just doing a quick read on Elaine Paige made it clear to me that she's among the best of the best when it comes to singing and acting. To say that she's the "Michael Jordan" of acting & singing wouldn't be an exageration.

BTW, she was born in 1948, which would make her 60 or so now. However, she's still getting work-OMG! I thought actresses were run off the stage & screen after 40! Here is Miss Paige in her 60s, yet she's still working?! What gives? Elaine Paige continues getting work simply because she's supremely talented, that's why.

Plus, even in her pictures, theres an effervescence about her; there's something special that just comes shining through. She conveys a genuine warmth, happiness, and love of life. These qualities no doubt come shining through in her performances too, which is why people still enjoy seeing her-even though she's past her physical prime. It's as I said before: if you're good enough to give people a reason to watch you, you will have work as an actress, no matter how old you are. Sorry, I digressed again...

Anyway, people weren't laughing at Susan Boyle because of her looks; they were laughing because she said that she wanted to be like the best in the business. Her comment was no different than a young boy who loves basketball aspiring to be like Micheal Jordan. If a young man were involved in an athletic competition involving basketball, and he said to the judging panel that he wanted to be like Michael Jordan, he'd be laughed at too.

I know what you will say. You will say that Paul Potts, the fat opera singer with the equally squashed face who won Britain's Got Talent in 2007, had just as hard a time at his first audition. I looked it up on YouTube. He did not. "I wasn't expecting that," said Simon to Paul. "Neither was I," said Amanda. "You have an incredible voice," said Piers. And that was it. No laughter, or invitations to paranoia, or mocking wolf-whistles, or smirking, or derision.

Yeah, but what Miss Gold neglects to say is that Paul Potts was much more presentable. His hair was appropriately cut & styled; it matched his face. His clothes were better; by any measure, they were better. Whether it was in terms of fit, match, or personal style (and by that, I mean clothes that 'go' with the person), he was better attired. Mr. Potts wasn't pretentious. He didn't try being something he wasn't; he didn't do like Susan Boyle did, and do the equivalent of wiggling his hips; he didn't try to be cute when he knew it wouldn't work. He didn't say that he wished to be like a famous, big name star, a la' Susan Boyle. He simply said that he was trying to fulfill the dream of singing professionally. IOW, Mr. Potts was more self aware, and he didn't trying being someone he isn't. Therefore, he didn't elicit the same reaction from the judges or the audience.

People weren't laughing at Susan so much because she isn't beautiful; that's a cop out, Miss Gold-shame on you! They were laughing because she tried to be cute, and it didn't work; they were laughing because Susan Boyle's attempt at being the sex kitten just plain did not WORK! It was not her, nor was it part of her persona. If she'd not done that, then I submit that the audience reaction would have been similar to that which greeted Mr. Paul Potts.

We see this all the time in popular culture. Do you ever stare at the TV and wonder where the next generation of Judi Denchs and Juliet Stevensons have gone? Have they fallen down a Rada wormhole? Yes. They're not there, because they aren't pretty enough to get airtime. This lust for homogeneity in female beauty means that when someone who doesn't resemble a diagram in a plastic surgeon's office steps up to the microphone, people fall about and treat us to despicable sub-John Gielgud gestures of amazement.

Where have the next generation of Judi Denchs gone? They were too busy trying to look good; they were too busy trying to be like their heroine & idol, Paris Hilton. They weren't trying to cultivate whatever talents and gifts God gave them, so they're not on the air-duh! Elaine Paige is in her 60s, yet she's still working. Why? Because she has the TALENT, that's why!

Oh, and Miss Gold, you contradict yourself here. In one breath, you say that women who aren't pretty can't get work; in the next breath, you mention Judi Dench, a woman well past her prime who is still working! Which is it, Miss Gold?! According to your main thesis of this article, an ugly and/or old woman shouldn't be able to get work, yet Judi Dench is still working. How can that be?! I'll tell you how it can be, you stupid bitch: Judi Dench has that PRESENCE, that special something that compells you to watch her, that's why!

Susan will probably win Britain's Got Talent. She will be the little munter that could sing, served up for the British public every Saturday night. Look! It's "ugly"! It sings! And I know that we think that this will make us better people. But Susan Boyle will be the freakish exception that makes the rule. By raising this Susan up, we will forgive ourselves for grinding every other Susan into the dust. It will be a very partial and poisoned redemption. Because Britain's Got Malice. Sing, Susan, sing - to an ugly crowd that doesn't deserve you.

Susan Boyle will do well simply because she has a voice that's Divine, that's why! She won't be served up for entertainment; she'll be served up because she has a voice that is truly a gift from God, Miss Gold. As for ugly comments and reactions, the only ones I see have been coming from you. You call Susan Boyle 'a munter'; I don't know what that is, but I can discern that it's not complimentary. The only one who's grinding the Susan Boyles of the world into dust are bitches like you, Miss Gold. Don't project your ugly hatred on the rest of us. Thank you, and good day...


23 March 2009

Knackster's Introductory Post


I was reading another thread when I belatedly discovered THIS gem! It's from Knackster, a fellow member on Mancoat. I'll let the post speak for itself...


Greetings all. This is Knacktastic. My friend Remo (who rarely posts here) got me interested in this site.

You all are going to either learn to love me or hate me, as I am something of a mish-mash of ideas, and ideals.

For example. I am not unplugged from the fematrix, but I interact with it via the pick up arts (yes I am PUA). I watched that thread with great interest, and while some of the info was spot on, much of it was totally non-accurate. As time continues Ill point out where and how. Many of the men here have earned a great deal of respect from me for how they articulate themselves, and for their firm stances

I am something of an anomaly in the PUA community, as I see men and women as being in a war ( I’m in support of a literal war against women and manginas ). Men are one army, and women (and their allies) the other. I also think of women as the enemy camp, that has supplies (pussy) that I want to raid. There are many in the PUA community that are total manginas, then again there are those that see the battlefield too and “raid for supplies”.

Being PUA has taught me a great deal of the female sex. Among this is that nearly no female can be trusted (there are a few but they are probably about 5% of the female population… maybe less). In the last three months, I have met one single female out of possibly thousands that I would trust fully as a mate (and my interactions with her were not very long). I can say in sincerity, that I would trade all the hot chicks I’ve slept with for one that was simply loyal. But lets face it, that barely exists in women does it?

Unlike many here I take a much stronger stand against women. I do not advocate equal rights for women. I do not even advocate equal treatment. I am in favor of a return to the Old English “rule of thumb”. Someone here posted that none of this will end until women are on leashes (or he might have said in cages I forget) but that person was correct. All rights, privileges and status must be stripped from women in our society if we are to have any real chance at survival as a society. This is one of the things that the Muslim nations have gotten right, and one area we defiantly could take a page from their playbook. No while I favor a total revocation of all rights, I would like some legal protections for the well being of women (sorta like how we protect animals).

I have to say that I agree 100% with Knackster on this point. If nothing else, recent history have given us a voluminous amount of empirical evidence that women are not capable of EXERCISING rights; recent history has shown our Muslim friends to be right about keeping women on a tight leash. Shoot, 70% of single women voted for Barack Obama! He's smooth talkin' devil if there ever were one; he's living proof that women will fall for someone with a good line. Too bad for us the SOB is a communist who will finish destroying this once, great nation-all because someone had the bright idea of giving women the vote! Anyway, since women are not capable of exercising rights, they cannot have them now, can they? I don't believe in animal rights, because animals aren't capable of exercising rights; even so, I don't at all advocate mistreating them. It's the same with women...

Shoot, Kato the Elder said as much CENTURIES ago! Here is his quote: "Woman is a violent and uncontrolled animal, and it is useless to let go the reins and then expect her not to kick over the traces. You must keep her on a tight rein . . . Women want total freedom or rather - to call things by their names - total licence. If you allow them to achieve complete equality with men, do you think they will be easier to live with? Not at all. Once they have achieved equality, they will be your masters . . ." -- Cato the Elder 234-149 B.C. quoted in "Livy’s History of Rome". Seems to me the man was a PROPHET...

So that’s it. My intro and a little background on me. Lets kick a little ass (or a fat feminist one).


That was good stuff, was it not? Though I am not a PUA and have no desire to become one, I can understand why guys like Knackster are PUAs. While I think it's wrong to use someone for my sexual pleasure (I've told Knack this both online and off), I can understand why guys do so. Having said that, he is correct when he says that the vast majority of women are amoral sluts who aren't worthy of our trust, our love, or anything else. He's right when he says that only a mere handful of modern women would make suitable mates. I didn't have to become a PUA to figure that out though; simple observation and using my brain were enough for that. In any case, I hope that you all enjoyed this post. Have a nice day!


03 January 2009

A Thirtysomething Career Woman Writes In...


I was checking out the Don't Get Married archives, and I found this gem of a post. It's a thirtysomething female lawyer's thoughts about an episode of "The Bachelor" reality show. It's good stuff from a female who figured things out, albeit too late. Oh well, that's NOT my problem, hehehe...

A 30-something female lawyer writes in:
I just had to write you tonight because of your recent posts about 30 something women having trouble finding husbands. I happened to watch The Bachelor Paris tonight. It was the first show where the Bachelor sends home 13 women. What happened in this show was a very illuminating example of what you have written.

One of the women was Allie G., a 33 year old Oncologist. The Bachelor is a Doctor and it was obvious that Allie thought that she was a shoo-in, because what male doctor wouldn’t appreciate a female doctor? During the show, when the Bachelor meets and talks with the women, Allie told him that she was ready to reproduce because her eggs were getting old.

Needless to say, Allie didn’t get a rose. I knew she wasn’t going to take that lying down when I saw the look on her face. It was apparent that she was disgusted with the Bachelor’s choices (most of whom appear to be in their twenties). How dare he turn down a DOCTOR.

Sure enough, the next scenes show Allie out cussing and griping to the other women about how she’s tried internet dating, matchmaking services and everything else to try to find a husband. She bemoaned the fact that men didn’t want her. She expressed that she worked hard and focused on her career and that men should want her for that and that the Bachelor was like every other f*@#&ing male doctor she’s ever known. (In fact, every other word was bleeped at that point) It wasn’t FAIR that she couldn’t get a husband. Look at her credentials!

Then, she’s interviewed alone and she says basically the same kinds of things, including that she couldn’t believe that he picked the other women when he should have picked her, a doctor.

She then goes and confronts the Bachelor and demands that he tell her why he didn’t pick her. He explains that her comment about being ready to reproduce was the reason. She goes into attack mode telling him that he should be ready to reproduce and why wasn’t he ready. Of course, she doesn’t listen to his comment that he doesn’t put the cart before the horse.

She storms off and gripes to the other women about how he should be ready to reproduce because he is in his thirties.

The show ends with her going on and on in the same vein with a show staff member (male) who is trying to escape her onslaught.

This was truly pitiful and I felt really sorry for her in her desperation. She bought into the garbage that men should want women who put career first.

I bought into that too, so I understand her confusion and disbelief when men didn’t flock around her because she was the pretty, smart, successful doctor. That only happens in movies and on television. She, like many professional women, forgot to develop those attributes men are really looking for. I’m not sure what those are, but I know they aren’t the ones upon which doctors and lawyers focus.

I just had to write you about this, it was so in line with what you have been saying. I can’t write about it at my blog because I’m afraid my parents will see it and think that I am talking about myself. Maybe you could write about it.

(And yes, I realize that The Bachelor is a very silly show)


I don't know about you, but that was good stuff! It was from this post that I first learned about "The Bachelor" episode featuring Dr. Allie G. I didn't see this video until months later. Then, I finally found it, so I could post it here. Anyway, I thought that this lawyer chick nailed it pretty well. It's too bad that she didn't figure things out till it was too late. Then again, that's not MY problem...