This blog is so wrong on so many levels

(92 Posts)
showtunesgirl Wed 30-Jan-13 13:01:06 Do people genuinely believe this crap? confused

LineRunner Wed 30-Jan-13 13:31:51

He thinks that shy girls still do have 'the slutty emotions' but don't usually act on them.

THis is a bit of charter for control freaks, really. Find a girl who is 'shy' and not too attractive on his strange scale of 1-10 and then make her grateful she got picked and boss her about a lot.

PretzelTime Wed 30-Jan-13 14:30:09

I'm not clicking on that, it's the usual pick up artist crap isn't it?

By Linerunner's decription he sounds like an unpleasant guy with too many "slutty emotions"....Oh god! What a phrase! Slutty emotion = sex drive? Shy girls (it's always girls, not women) have sex drives too?! Omg, who would have thought that!!

KirstyoffEastenders Wed 30-Jan-13 14:32:51

I saw this, Sharon Horgan tweeted about it. I didn't read the whole thing but it must be a joke, I refuse to believe that anyone could hold views like that, let alone share them in a blog.

PretzelTime Wed 30-Jan-13 14:34:55

Slutty emotions. The phrase is too amazing for my brain to handle.

DontPhoneItIn Wed 30-Jan-13 14:36:40

Read the first paragraph and couldn't get any further. Bleurgh! envy

PoppyAmex Wed 30-Jan-13 14:42:05

The few comments I read are even more disturbing!

LineRunner Wed 30-Jan-13 14:44:41

I used to think Peter Stringfellow was a caricature but then found out he was real.

Mr Shy-Girl-Blogger also seems very angry about the pretty girls (and their slutty emotions) 'fucking around'. And that's why you should get a modest girl who will gaze at you adoringly and make sure she doesn't have any slutty friends.

It sounds mad but on the other hand perhaps he is articulating what many abusers actually do.

DontPhoneItIn Wed 30-Jan-13 15:00:12

Poppy the comments are just bizarre! (I was finally brave enough to scroll down)

FloraFox Wed 30-Jan-13 16:31:11

I don't want to click on it either, it does sound like PUA/game bullshit. I think some men really do believe this though. Abusers charter indeed. Eugh.

feministefatale Wed 30-Jan-13 16:35:52

You want a girlfriend who looks up to you

I like to take that to mean he just fancies short people and not that he wants his girlfriend to look up to him- like she is a child.

showtunesgirl Wed 30-Jan-13 16:36:25

It's genuinely weird! It's like ALL women can according to this guy just be categorised and labelled. confused

Jesus Christ.

He's obviously off his rocker. Or just trying to wind people up??

slug Wed 30-Jan-13 16:52:16

I don't think he's quite grasped the idea that women are actually people.

McBalls Wed 30-Jan-13 17:05:20

So you must keep trying to get the shy girl to fuck you, but if she does then she's not a "good girl" after all, just a used up old whore.

It's like a bloody witch trial.

MrsMushroom Wed 30-Jan-13 17:14:06

Shy girls do not typically have the black girl attitude of “I don’t need no man. I’m as strong as a man. I’m just as good as a man. I’m just one of the guys.” or any of that bullshit.

What???? What???? This man is a lunatic and a racist sexist one at that!!

LineRunner Wed 30-Jan-13 21:01:15

I didn't read as far as that comment, MrsMushroom. On just how many levels is that wrong ... <implodes>

sciencelover Thu 31-Jan-13 18:22:46

How bizarre. It sounds like a teenage boy trying to impress his friends.

FastidiaBlueberry Fri 01-Feb-13 12:13:45

This bloke is dangerous to women.

He's clearly a very abusive person.

CBA to read the blog, but the whole point of blogs is that any fuckwit with an opinion, however stupid, can have a blog and air his/her idiotic views. Why draw attention to one arsehole among millions?

Actually, I thought better and read it. It's hilarious. This guy probably can't even interact with a check-out worker without wetting his pants in fright. It's a magnificent depiction of a thick no-mates who's never had sex with anything other than his teddy bear.

MidnightMasquerader Sat 02-Feb-13 08:09:00

A least he is out there making his complete ineptness known to womankind....

PretzelTime Sat 02-Feb-13 09:25:20

Let's hope he is inept and never gets close to any girls.
Unfortunately he is just one among many guys who are spreading the PUA mentality. Those other how to's and blogs that I've seen are about how to raise your confidence by looking down on ladies and objectifying them, targeting women with bad self-confidence so you can "neg" them, how to get alone with your target as quickly as possibly so she can't change her mind and say no to sex. Vile stuff.

Softlysoftly Sat 02-Feb-13 10:25:25

He truly disturbed, I'm guessing though that he sits in all day eating steak working on his weights and wanking so woman kind should be safe.

Saying that though dv exists so perhaps he ought to be locked away for safety

JakeBullet Sat 02-Feb-13 10:35:24

Thanks for linking to this. I am a "shy girl"who shuns men .....and blogs like this show me how right I am not to bother with relationships. Okay so I know not all men are like this but quite honestly I cannot be bothered to sort the wheat from the chaff. My son will be brought upto respect both himself and women.

MrsKeithRichards Sat 02-Feb-13 10:56:28

That's some scary shit, his knuckle dragging followers seem grateful for the advice, which is worrying.

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 10:57:26

There are lots of really, really inferior men around.


AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 11:00:14

What a silly man, advertising his inadequacy to the whole wide world

SerenityX Sat 02-Feb-13 11:34:22

He probably does very well. A lot of what he says is psychologically sound. Based on principles of human behaviour and persuasion. The was a very good book called 'Split Second Persuassion' and articles in magazines like New Scientist. The Valentine's Day edition of NS is always and interesting read at de-mystifying love/lust into nothing more than the body & mind entering a sate of an oxytocin high and duping yourself into thinking what you want.

Of course it eventually wears off and hopefully by that time your relationship has more solid ground of mutual respect, imbedded self image (seeing yourself as part of the relationship), co-dependency (some sort of mutual need - caring for a child or increased standard of life) and complacency.

He is by far not the only one and one of the least disturbing. At least his advice is towards getting a girlfriend and not one night stands.

He also advises 6-7s and to avoid confident alpha women. Again you go into any city bar and most beautiful women will be alone and ignored. Guys will assume they are too hard to get and too much work. Their rise up the corporate ladder becomes a self fulfilling proficy to compensate for a lack of relationships. The guys beautiful women attract tend to be the real slime balls!

His tactics are nothing new. This is why men go to Thailand, date younger women (less experienced) and like women to earn less than they do. It is hard wired in men's brains to want to be the leader and hunter in the relationship. Basic primal instincts.

Plus dating down men feel they are getting a good deal.

The real downside is that are a lot worse that tell guys to choose vulnerable (emotionally & low self image) to turn them into prostitutes. That Asian ring in the news now chose runaways and girls from broken families and abused them in the most demeaning ways.

I think every young girl should read more and understand how her mind works and can play tricks on her.

If you ask anyone who has ever been in abusive relation they key warning sign was 'Charm'. The antidote is EDUCATION and not getting fooled.

This article resonates because it is exactly the kind of tutorial and profile an abusive man would want in a woman. Of course not all men attracted to these type of women would be abusers. Just that the abusers would rule out anyone confident and assertive or very good looking. They also would not want less attractive women either because their need comes from their own insecurity and needing their ego fed. It is a complete myth that anyone woman could end up in an abusive relationship.

Hope this helps!

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 11:59:17


It is actually hard-wired in patriarchy, to spout silly evo-bollocks about men being hard-wired blah di blah.



How much stupidity can one woman take on a Saturday morning? Should I just turn on Top Gear and be done with it?

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 12:03:37

Top Gear would look quite reconstructed after some of the shite you see online smile

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 12:04:47

Is it reconstructed, or unreconstructed I mean?. Something looks wrong there.

Top Gear presenters are twats anyway, that I am sure of

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 12:13:20

And one of them is not even a hamster.

AmberLeaf Sat 02-Feb-13 12:16:34

When you finally do get in you’ll have the pleasure of saying, into her ear, “you’re my property now“

What a dick.

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 12:18:25


I missed that bit.


ubik Sat 02-Feb-13 12:23:15



I despair

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 12:32:47

I blame evo-bollocks.

Which is a sub-set of patriarchy, which is ultimately to blame.

How can people write this shit and not be embarrassed?

Or is it ironic?

It's hard-wired for women to like pink as well, because of its connotations with menstrual blood. And they like mops because during evolution, they found that men with really messy hair (like mops) brought home most unicorn-flesh. I have no evidence whatsoever for this, but nevertheless it is true and accounts for why women should do more housework than men.

And men like blue because during the ice-age, their dicks went blue on account of the cold. And they have some sort of genetic memory of that which means that now they have a hard-wired instinct to wrap their boy-children in blue as a nod to that era.

And now I'm going to shoot myself.

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 12:34:07

hahaha < thump >

SerenityX Sat 02-Feb-13 12:45:52

By 'evo bollocks' I assume you mean evolution and scientific research into behaviour, chemical & physiology changes? I would add to it that there have been a lot ethnographic data and cultural changes as well as the structure of societies which have had a tremendous impact.

In fact one could argue that most of the evolution has been at the pyschological and pathological level and not at the physical level. The chemical secretions have not changed. People still emit the same pheromones and chemicals like oxytocin. The brain works the same with neurotransmitters firing off to try to make sense if the external stimuli by creating connections and feeding these back as paterns & memory matching.

The only difference now is the chemicals can be bought over the Internet. Salesmen love spraying themselves down with oxytocin to make it easier to sell you that used car. Sure the secondary market is psychopaths and guys desperate to get women into bed.I know a magician who swears by his special cologne whichs people more suggestionable. Fascinating!

Lots of recent studies have been done to show that despite all the changes and living in a modern society we still have the 'human condition' as part of the same animal kingdom with similarities to apes still evident.

Never watched TopGear but it sounds dreadful. If it indeed it is as stupid as you say it is. And I thought all that nonsense about horroscopes was bad.

This is my favourite source -

This is a brilliant article - but you need to register - paid subscription.

Apologies that you found the links too dumb for you but I was trying to find a link for free that referenced the same research and factual principles of what happens when people fall for love tactics.

I take your point that it does seem dumb that despite all the evolution we still have some serious shortcomings in being able to overcome 'hard wiring'.

My current work is looking at how cults still successfully operate, pyramid marketing schemes, advertising, consumerism, religion etc. still can influence us. Be great if there was a pill we could take or give to people to 'wake them up' from their delusions but we can't.

The only option so far is education, laws to protect people who take advantage of human shortcomings and continued research as well as support.

BelaLugosisShed Sat 02-Feb-13 12:52:07

I love evo-bollocks, it makes such perfect sense.

It's great that these idiots publicise just how moronic they really are - much like the tossers who go round in those hilarious "nice legs, what time do they open" type t-shirts , saves women the trouble of wasting time actually talking to them to find out.

ubik Sat 02-Feb-13 12:57:29

Can I ask what you mean by 'hard wired?'

I can't quite make my mind up whether this is hilarious or fucking terrifying.

FairyWingsAndFlyingThings Sat 02-Feb-13 13:10:42

Apparently men should aspire to be 'gentlemenly cavemen'? I don't - I can't even- head explodes
I also like how he advises you hold a woman by her wrist or the back of her neck - like she's gonna get lost or something. Although considering how he advises you choose an girl who isn't mature or independent or strong maybe that's a real problem.
Also - eye contact, a sign a girl likes you? Whaaa...?
He sounds like an abusive Dick who wouldn't understand what 'no' means. I spent the whole time reading it sure that no real person could believe such bollocks and it must've been written by a troll.

PretzelTime Sat 02-Feb-13 13:31:20

Looks like a PUA got on the thread. It was only a matter of time wasn't it.


Quoted because it's beautiful

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 13:38:28


That wasn't my point actually.

My point was that all this crap about hard-wiring is simply not true. The studies done that "show" it is, have mostly been discredited and not replicable, not peer-reviewed and simply not credible. Or the results are credible, but the conclusions drawn from the results are simply sexist because the men people drawing those conclusions are sexist. They are simply based on a desperate scrabble to prove that the reason we need to retain a male-supremacist society, is because nature wants us to and we can't escape our hard-wiring. It's all bollocks.

SerenityX Sat 02-Feb-13 14:10:31

"Hard wired" is a term to describe a concept of Pyscological Nativism and Innateness.

Used in cognitive development it describes how some aspects of behavior are present at birth and not learned behaviour. For example how babies can immediately recognise faces and do not have a fear of people.

Any fear that would come later would come from "bad experiences".

In the broader sense it can also include fixed or long term thinking of societal beliefs. It is also being studied to find out if mood disorders are innate or not. Why are some people more depressed on grey days vs sunny days. How much is psychosomatic and how much is innate. When he behaviour was learned - at what stage in brain development.

Huge part of being a parent is around cognitive behaviors.

As a parent no matter how much try to influence behaviour traits are still there and society has it's own aspects which seem 'hardwired'. This is a much more loose definition than innate behaviors but from a child's naiave perspective "well all the other kids do this so it must be normal".

The reason why these guys write that stuff is because it actually works. To a degree. For him to be successful he just needs an appropriate victim. Some one who fits his target profile and does not know enough about psychology to see through him and his BS.

This is the same way cults and advertising work as well by understanding the basics of human behaviour and figuring out how to exploit our shortcomings.

As anyone who has ever tried to loose weight, save money, become mate motivated etc.... Will know that knowledge is not enough! Knowing how to eat well is not a magic pill for loosing weight. Habits, coping mechanisms and hard wired beliefs all come into play.

A guy who has a crappy attitude to women and sees them as prey to be controlled, manipulated and out smarted is on the abusive scale whether he is abusive or not. I would be very concerned if I found my son reading books on how to control & manipulate people.

Thankfull, so far he seems a very compassionate young man and wants to study science to make a difference in the world.

SerenityX Sat 02-Feb-13 14:35:14

You will also find there are more women in the social and pyschological sciences now than men. It isn't sexism that is hard wired but aspects that allow people to be manipulated. More women are going into university and getting higher grades. Women are now starting to our earn men. I earn more than my partner.

We certainly can escape both innate beliefs and societal ones. It's called education and understanding of what the root cause is and how to overcome and recognise bad patterns.

Who knows there maybe hope for you yet to escape doing most of the housework. In my house I get off lightly because of the long hours I work.

FreyaSnow Sat 02-Feb-13 14:51:35

I don't know what being a hunter in a relationship is meant to mean. Hunting is when you stalk and kill an an animal. Most men don't do this anymore. So how is being a hunter in a relationship hard wired into the brain?

SerenityX Sat 02-Feb-13 15:30:48

Funny! Your theory is taking this way off topic...

However if you want to put it that at you may want to have a read of an article on a study done of stalking and how some people become delusional. The hard wired part has to with the way people can be manipulated or addicted to Dopamines.

At one point the author said "stalkers could be hard wired"

As the facts are inconclusive and it is just a theory I will suspend my judgement on that one. It does raise some interesting aspects of why stalkers and sexual predators are so difficult to cure or treat.

Neuroanthropoglogy certainly has a long way to go.

TheOriginalLadyFT Sat 02-Feb-13 15:45:11

Frankly, he sounds like someone with serious self esteem issues with a deep seated need to project his self loathing onto women.

Either that or he's a total wanker who needs a good kick in the crotch

FreyaSnow Sat 02-Feb-13 16:13:17

I didn't mention any kind of theory. I stated a fact. A hunter is a person who stalks and kills animals.

It would be polite if you could explain what you mean by men being hardwired to be the hunters in relationships.

I simply don't understand what your statement is meant to mean.

OneHandFlapping Sat 02-Feb-13 16:15:17

Jeez, what that guy needs is a blow up doll - the ultimate "shy girl", with no slutty emotions whatsoever. He certainly shouldn't be allowed to inflict himself on a real woman.

Sadly, a lot of men seems to think like this. Or maybe I've just been unlucky.

SerenityX Sat 02-Feb-13 16:23:40


You hit the nail on the head. Guys who tend to this have massive self esteem issues of their own. Their insecurity leads them into playing manipulative mind games and projecting their feeling of inferiority onto other people. The dangerous part is that the feeling of power can be addictive. The contol can also escalate in deviousness & systemic abuse.

Only a very small minority of guys who get into this crap turn bad but some turn very bad. Ted Bundy - America's charming serial killer.

Fortunately most guys never very good at it and have underlying good intentions of just wanting to get a girlfriend and after a bit of initial success their self confidence grows that they do not need this anymore.

I think Serenity is actually saying that this man is a knob, not that he's 'right'. And it is true, unfortunately, that some of the tactics he seems to be advocating would work on vulnerable, unhappy people (whether that's to get sex from them, get money from them or generally gain power over them).

But people are not 'hardwired' to victimhood, and can learn to laugh at and walk away from predators. And many con artists are actually rubbish at the 'art' and the response they get is mockery rather than compliance. So in fact publicising blogs like this and laughing at them is a good way to encourage other people to react to this sort of approach in a healthy way ie with derision.

TheOriginalLadyFT Sat 02-Feb-13 16:30:04

You only have to look at the language used - that women are manipulative, devious etc, without any irony that the entire blog is about how to manipulate women into a relationship.

I actually find this sort of thing quite frightening - men like this do not like women, and it's not a big leap from saying/thinking unpleasant things to acting them out

alexpolismum Sat 02-Feb-13 16:31:10

I just showed this to my dh. He said "Is this a wind up? Or is the writer an inadequate teenager who has watched too many romantic comedy films, they always have shit plots like this"

WitchOfEndor Sat 02-Feb-13 16:33:10



TeamEdward Sat 02-Feb-13 17:17:30

A shy girl may very well want to go slow. She will need to comfortable around you. She’ll say “I’m not ready“, “You’re too fast“, or “Can we take it slower?” and you’ll sure “absolutely. I understand“. There are two types of women who say things like this. Genuinely shy girls and used-up ex whores who are trying to trap a man. A genuine shy girl is, ahem, shy and doesn’t want to get naked and grunt like an animal for fear of being embarrassed. A used-up ex-whore is playing a game with you.

If she says “I want to take it slow” and you say “Yes, me too” and then actually do take it slow you are wasting your time. You need to be the aggressor. You do not want to be the testicle impaired shoulder to cry on. You want to be the hunter, not the bystander. Every chance you get, every time you are alone you need to make her as turned on as humanly possible. You want her to get wet and flustered. Every time she is able to resist and say “no” when she is hot & bothered is another point in her good girl favor.
"No" still means "No", fuckwit.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 17:20:19

If you think that's bad google MGTOW. That's where these PUA losers end up when they can't make it work.

serenity I found most of your post very interesting though I'm not buying the hardwired bit for hunter behaviour. "Evolutionary psychology" is inherently not scientific as the subjects can't be studied. Maybe in a few million years scientists can look at our studies of ourselves now and come up with something. Now it's just theorizing based on assumptions, usually deeply sexist ones.

I did like the article about the type of women a users are not attracted to.

PretzelTime Sat 02-Feb-13 17:34:35

Which article was that Flora?

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 17:45:41

This one pretzel

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 17:46:10
AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 17:55:45

hmm, flora

In agree with some aspects of the article in your last link, but it's a bit victim-blaming for me

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 17:56:21

I not In

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 18:01:01

I think the article is a pile of victim-blamey crap tbh.

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 18:04:57

AA, say what you mean, stop holding back smile

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 18:11:19

The loser in the OP is doing exactly what is discussed in the article and writing a charter for other abusers to do the same thing. There are actually quite a lot of these fuckwits doing this game bullshit and others for whom it just comes naturally.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 18:13:13

I'm really interested AA and AF how you think we should deal with these losers and how do we reach our daughters and young women to deal with them without being victim-blaming?

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 18:17:13

We need to focus on the abuser's behaviour instead of that of the potential victim.

That article, part of the problem with it, is that it's wrong. I only read the first few para's because life is short, but this idea that abusers don't like "strong" women who will give their opinion - this is just incorrect. Many abusers get turned on by the idea of "taming" a strong woman. The idea that they're all looking for "shy girls" like this lunatic in the OP, is just wrong.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 18:23:45

Ok so some will target women with low self-esteem and some might get off on taming a strong woman. How do we help women avoid both sorts of abusers without victim blaming?

colditz Sat 02-Feb-13 18:29:08

Bwahhhh ha ha ha what a dick.

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 18:30:35

I'm a northerner, what can I say AF grin

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 18:32:14

Getting our daughters to recognise red flags, Flora, I'd say.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 18:34:49

Isn't that what the article is saying though - these are the warning signs.

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 18:59:47

Well it didn't come over to me that way. It seemed to be all about how the abuser will change according to your reaction to his behaviour. Which is bollocks. Dangerous bollocks at that.

I just skim read though so I'll read it properly now.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 19:07:48

I didn't read it that way, which would be awful and dangerous nonsense. I thought it was more like: if he says something negative, call him on it. Then keep your guard up. If he doesn't do it again maybe it was just a one-off but if he keeps it up LTB. More about identifying them rather than changing. I'll read it again. Maybe I picked it up wrong. The idea that you can change an abuser is one of the things we should teach young women against.

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 19:11:02

AA, I'm a Northerner too grin

Flora, please don't think I am criticising you. I think that drawing attention to the way these abusive men work is always a good thing

But what made me a bit uncomfortable about this article is that it says if a woman didn't do X, Y or Z means that she invited more abuse and is tantamount to victim blaming.

My own approach to red flag demonstration (which this article seemed to strangely just hold back from saying) is one strike and you are out

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 19:27:44

OK read again and the only red flags they mention are hitting you and calling you names. And the advice to calling you names is to state that you don't want him to do that. So far so good. But any man who respects that was probably just having a bad day and not an abuser. An abuser may stop for a bit but will always start up again. It doesn't say what to do at that point. Because you will be much further down the "romance" line at that point. You may even be pregnant or have a child or be financially dependent on him. But of course there are plenty of other indicators of abusive behaviour other than name calling. Abusers can be polite!

The article states that an abuser doesn't want a woman who will report them if they assault them. Abusers who assault have the sense of entitlement that justifies the assault in their mind. They believe they are right. They also get this sense of entitlement because society allows them to do this without much recourse. They know if they hit their partner and she calls the police that they are unlikely to get more than a slap on the wrist. That is if they believe the woman. Things are getting better on that front but it is still weighted against the victim.

As Fastidia said the focus has to be on the abuser's behaviour. For a start it is impossible to remain confident and strong throughout the whole of your life. Things will knock you down. And some.of the suggestions in the article are risible. Authoratitive voice? Wtf is that? That is hugely subjective. Secondly, changing your behaviour just doesn't work with abusers. It can make your life easier but it won't ultimately change their behaviour or attitude.

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 19:30:08

Oh no I wasn't criticising you Flora at all. It is the article that has invited my criticism and annoyance!

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 19:32:01

And another thing abusers may try one thing and find that doesn't work so try something else. They want to control you and generally have a lot of tools in their armoury.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 19:33:33

Well I'm Scottish and thick of hide so don't worry about it smile Yes I can see that point. Being inclined to tell people (men and women) to GTF IRL rather than put up with shit, it seems obvious to me that that's the outcome so I read that in rather than reading in "if you don't it's your fault". I worry about girls continuing to be socialised as passive and catering to male ego. Teaching girls to be assertive not put up with shit is important but I do agree about not saying "and if you don't it's your fault". Having said that, most of the strong older women I knew when I was a child, usually did say things like that. It was harsh but their advice was still better than the alternative "stand by your man" crap that lots of other women used to say. Not saying we can't be better though and thanks for your views.

FastidiaBlueberry Sat 02-Feb-13 19:37:01

Yes the article seems to me to put the onus on you to remain strong forever.

And none of us can do this. As AA says, there are times when the strongest of us will be hit by stuff and so aren't going to be able to draw on the permanent strength this article demands.

That's when awareness of what abusive behaviour is, would be so helpful.

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 19:47:17

Yes I think you are right Flora. It is about counteracting the damaging messages women receive all the time with regards relationships. Like they have to be in one. Or you need to be in a relationship to have a child, or stalking is really men being romantic (like the Rom coms etc.

But society doesn't make it easy for us to leave. There are punishments for single women and single mothers.

FloraFox Sat 02-Feb-13 19:54:02

AA very much agree. I was raised by one. My Mum cofounded our local Women's Aid (no DV in our situation though). She did tell me I'd be a shit counsellor.

AbigailAdams Sat 02-Feb-13 19:59:33


PretzelTime Sat 02-Feb-13 20:13:54

There are sadly so many young women out there in need of info on red flags, and healthy relationships. I wish there was a easy way to spread the info to them.

Do you know any good articles/resources for young women (or all women really)?

AnyFucker Sat 02-Feb-13 20:43:40

This stuff should be taught in schools from about the age of 13, IMO

AbigailAdams Sun 03-Feb-13 07:34:37

Pretzel Lundy Bancroft's Why does he do that is excellent. Should be required reading in schools IMO.

Also on the OP of the emotionally abusive threads in Relationships are some great resources for recognising abusers and abusive behaviour.

AnyFucker Sun 03-Feb-13 14:33:52

I second the first post of the Emotional Abuse support thread. Loads of links and resources there.

FastidiaBlueberry Sun 03-Feb-13 21:43:54

Lookee here what I've just stumbled across, apropos of evo-bollocks.

I do think that teaching DDs to think 'Bwhahaha, LOSER' every time a man does something red-flaggy would be good. And also, showing DDs that we love them and value them and that they are good, worthwhile people even when/if they make mistakes - basically giving them self-esteem and reasonable boundaries. Someone who has been raised by reasonable, loving, good parents will usually have enough self esteem to be able to say 'Actually, fuck off, I won't put up with mistreatment'. Unfortunately, abusers do have a kind of radar for people who are already vulnerable and some abusers have a finely-tuned radar for the person who appears strong but has a major weak spot.

Really, the most important lesson to teach young women is it's fine to be single. You do not need a heteromonogamous relationship to make you a real person. Couplehood is not actually that much fun, and it's only worth giving up the joys of the single life for a partner who is really good-quality.

grumpyinthemorning Mon 25-Feb-13 14:03:33

Huh, I clearly made a mistake choosing a DP who is interested in what I have to say, treats me as an equal and encourages me to speak my mind. I should dump him and get with a controlling prick who treats me like a cross between a blow-up sex toy and a child barely out of nappies.

Oh, wait, that's what I left XP to get away from.

What a knob. I really hope nobody actually believes this shit.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion


Register now