Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Countrygirl or Citychick?

OK, so you all saw this coming...

It is only fair to extend this debate to the ladies :-)
When I asked if country men were more 'masculine' than city guys, I was more willing to listen to the opinions of ladies than men for obvious reasons.
Now it's the gentlemen's turn to sit back and do the appraising.
Ladies are still welcome to give their opinion, but I am going to give the men a higher priority here :-)

I think this post will be more difficult to write. Maybe because I am a woman myself and I therefore find it hard to be completely objective about women they way I know I can about men.
But I shall try my best.

And this time, the question is not 'who is more feminine' but 'what do you think of these two women'?
At the risk of displeasing women everywhere in my attempt to generalise, here goes:
*deep breath*

As I did for the men, assume both types of women described here are of the same level of attraction and a similar age, let's just say, mid twenties.
Both have at least a high school education and both are happy where they are in terms of locality.

Rural Maiden

This woman is likely to be traditional-minded in the sense that she wants to be married before long. She probably got baby-cravings since her mid-teens. Life would not make sense to her unless she is someone's daughter, wife and mother, in that order.
She may well have dated a few men, and would most likely have tried to get each and everyone of them to commit to her in the past.
She will feel a true failure if she is not only married but also a mother by age 30.
It is perhaps an untenable thought that she will be single forever like her 45-year old auntie who lives in the city.
She is perhaps more likely to be 'modest or a 'semi-modest', at least in dress and general behaviour, but not necessarily more 'moral'. Her small community dictates that whatever she does is under scrutiny whether she likes it or not.
However, more often than not, she likes the constraints put on her by her society.
Paradoxically she could also be amazingly free-spirited. She is more likely than her city counterpart to be free of a 'herd'. She may have one or two best friends, but that's it. She wouldn't be part of a thirty-strong coach-load of partying singles.
She doessn't have the time for that.
She may have a job that is practical and very much at the heart of the community she serves.
She is not folding her hands in her lap and doing nothing, that's for sure.
If she is not doing something that pays well, she is at least helping out, volunteering in something.
Because her community does not allow slackers.
The drawback to this woman is that she may be in danger of expecting "too much" of a man.
She may indeed bring lots to the table, but that means she also expects a lot.
She may or may not want a traditional man. The irony is that because she is traditional, she would be willing to go with the flow with the man she chooses, whether or not he is traditional-minded, like her.
But she may do best with someone exactly like her.
She is 'feminine'. Just as much as her brother 'Hillbilly' is intrinsically 'masculine', in some intangible, raw, 'natural' manner.
She doesn't know of any other way to be a woman.
At college, she was amused at how aggressive some of her classmates were.
She dismissed it as some sort of 'city' thing.
She wouldn't believe it if you explained to her that that is actually the reality of some women's lives.
Rural maiden has a lot of problems, but none of her problems include being a non-feminine woman.
She lives too close to Nature to deviate from her natural instincts.



Urban Lass

This woman who is city-born and bred is, like her male counterpart, slightly more complicated than Rural Maiden.
For a start she is more prone to be far removed from her family than Rural Maiden.
She may be living alone.
She may be a 'career gal' or not. But if she is, she is not necessarily a feminist.
She has to eat, right?
She has to live somewhere.
She may or may not be a rich Daddy's girl.

Urban Lass is exposed to more people in general than Rural Maiden. She may however be far removed from 'man-oasis' unlike Cityboy who is often surrounded by women.
Urban Lass is actually more likely than Rural Maiden to be surrounded by a herd of women, and despite being in the midst of many people, be severely short of 'suitable' men to pick from.
She is undoubtedly more 'busy' than Rural Maiden.
She has more work, more leisure activities and more pressures on her.
Such is urban life in general.
In addition, she may also create this illusion, intentionally or unintentionally, because 'the herd' creates a competitive streak in her.
Urban Lass is more likely to have been partnered up by a certain age than Rural Maiden, although not necessarily married before Rural Maiden.
Urban Lass has to be more savvy than Rural Maiden just to survive. In this sense, she is much more useful as a 'co-captain' for a marriage-minded man. However, this may count against her, because of the inevitable 'strong and independent' label she acquires unwittingly or otherwise. She may have many more 'life skills' than Rural Maiden, some of which may not be obvious to a man. She may be perfectly able to cook and clean but her decidedly 'party lifestyle' may give a different impression. Her budgeting skills may be hidden by the fact that she earns more than Rural Maiden.
Is Citygirl ever as feminine as Rural Maiden?
In my opinion, generally, yes. At least outwardly so. I am willing to bet perhaps even more so than Rural Maiden.
But there is something about city life that tampers with her a little.
Rural Maiden is not afflicted by this particular problem.

Urban Lass has many tools at her disposal to make her life truly exciting.
Those same tools can also ruin her life.
Like her brother Cityboy, she leads a complicated existence.


Who is more appealing to men?
Who is the better prospect for marriage in a man's eyes?
Who is likely to get married first?
Who is likely to stay married?

If you get the sense that these are all trick questions, you would be right :-)

But only in the sense that we all recognise that everyone is right. It is afterall, a question of preference.
If at all possible, please self-identify as city man/woman or rural man/woman when commenting so it would be possible to see what the trends are in terms of 'like begets like' and all that...


Again, I don't really know what I am talking about in this post. I have been both a citygirl and a rural maiden but at very different epoques in my life, so I am not a reliable 'control subject' for myself.

But I am fascinated by how much one's environment affects one's self-perception and that of others.
Enlighten me.
Pretty please.


34 comments:

Caelaeno said...

I am, obviously, not of the right gender to evaluate--but good job on the descriptions. They were, in my opinion, quite fair. I would say, though, that I have known quite a few country girls hatchet were determined to show that they could hold their own with any boy...and often could. =)

Grasshopper said...

I live in the suburbs of a major city and at least here suburbanites are a different breed than those who live in the city proper. But consider me a “city man” for the sake of this thread.

“…Who is more appealing...” I have to admit I like the Urban Lass better myself.

You nailed it when you said “…Urban Lass has to be more savvy …, she is much more useful as a 'co-captain' for a marriage-minded man…”

In terms of a family unit the urban lass would seem to be better able to pull her weight and contribute to the welfare of the entire family.

I would not have to worry about her as much because I’d know she can take care of herself and stay out of trouble.

She also has a greater potential for making money. I recall reading somewhere that the divorce rates were lower the higher the income and education of both partners. So I think a marriage to Urban Lass has a greater chance to succeed.

The whole herd issue does not bother me. I’ve encountered this plenty of times and know how to deal with it.

So consider this one vote for Urban Lass.

Grasshopper

Spacetraveller said...

@ Caelaeno,

Thanks! It was a bit of a stab in the dark, so I am glad you think it was fairly accurate :-)
Can I ask what you mean by 'hold their own'?

@ Grasshopper,

Interesting!
One vote for Urban Lass it is then.
You are a brave man if you have faced the formidable 'herd' and triumphed :-)
Some of your brothers are not so gifted...

just visiting said...

I've been both, so this is a tough one.

I think that internally and behaviour wise, country girls may be more feminine. But city girls have it made when it comes to looking more feminine. (Hard to maintain that frame mucking out stalls.Lol.)

dannyfrom504 said...

they both have their perks. i like the savvy city gal, but i also like the down home feminimity of a country girl.

i guess the real question would be....where would you want to live? i've been a ciry boy and i currently live in a more "country" area.

tomayto, tomahto

Spacetraveller said...

Wow, this seems a much closer race than that of 'Hillbilly/Cityboy' where Mr Rural seemed to win hands down.

JV, I totally agree with you that Citygal certainly gives the illusion of 'feminine allure' much more than Countrygal (who may not be so focussed on her outer appearance).
But is it false advertising of sorts??
Are men being 'taken in' by the feminine exterior of Citygal only to wish later they had gone for 'Countrygal' when it is perhaps too late?
Or is it nothing at all to do with either girl...is it a function of the age of the man?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that when men are younger, Citygal is all the rage. When they get a bit older, Countrygal seems to appeal more?
Anyone else think this could be true?

Danny,
Are you confident that a Citygal can adjust to Country life should you transport her there, and vice versa for Countrygal, or do you just want to settle somewhere and then find a woman who already lives there...

Grasshpper said...

“…Are you confident that a Citygal can adjust to Country life should you transport her there…”

Have you ever seen the 60’s TV show Green Acres?

Grasshopper

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveler:

Are men being 'taken in' by the feminine exterior of Citygal only to wish later they had gone for 'Countrygal' when it is perhaps too late?

My reply:

City girl speaking, it seems that the stereotype is that City Girl lives the "Sex in the City" lifestyle, when in reality, she does not necessarily live like that. She is presumed to be hard-nosed, but even though she might be like that at work, she might be different at home.

Yes, the city encourages a level of partying, but that is par for the course, museums, parties, etc. Why hold that against city girl? It is merely the reality of her community. Does that mean she can't have her downtime and quiet moments?

I like that you mentioned she might be good at cooking and maintaining a household, because the presumption is that she would be clueless, eating out every night, not knowing how to cook.

Eating out all the time can be expensive, so she might not do them all the time, and thus she learns to economize.

I admit, I can look the most feminine and alluring of them, sophisticated dress, makeup, jewelry, when I go in to my job in the city. It is an important part of the city girl image, to cultivate a jaw-dropping look.

Yet, when I'm at home, running errands, that stuff is all in the closet. I'd look closer to rural girl, denims, sweaters, clogs, galoshes in the rain, no make-up.

It seems to me that the stereotype is just that, a stereotype. City guy knows that City Girl can be quite multifaceted, interesting and intriguing.

Funny, recently, I went to the bank after work one afternoon. The bank teller was surprised to see me, she thought I looked so nice in my work clothes. She is so used to seeing me in "dress down mode." My private joke is "I clean up real well!"

PVW

Anonymous said...

In other words, I'm a city girl with the background and looks for it, but at home, I live more like country girl.

PVW

dannyfrom504 said...

I'm a man. I'll choose my enviornment and pick from the women available. What's most important is that I'm in a place I feel comfortable.

The women are completely irrellavant.

MissMarie said...

My pretty pink rubber boots don't make me feminine when I muck stalls? Shucks...

Spacetraveller said...

@ Miss Marie,

"My pretty pink rubber boots don't make me feminine when I muck stalls?"

This is by far the funniest comment I have had in a while!
This earns you a special welcome to The Sanctuary!

You made me think of those people who go to McDonalds and order a quarter-pounder, mega french fries, three buckets of fried chicken, eight buckets of ice-cream.... and a diet coke :-)

I am sure your pink boots do the trick quite nicely.
Mr Rural can't miss 'em surely!

:-)


@ Grasshopper,

No, I hadn't seen that show, but I just looked it up. It reminds me of the British comedy 'The Good Life' where a city couple decides to move to the country and become totally self-sufficient - grow their own food, use cow-dung to supply their electricity, etc. Funny show.

@ PVW,

You make excellent points. I think the show 'Sex and the city' has certainly done 'City girls' no favours, for sure...
And, I accept that most city girls may not be what I describe above.

But...I think men are much more prone to 'stereotyping' women (at least at first sighting) than women are of men. Case in point: the entire Manosphere!
A woman will decide a man is 'special' far earlier than a man will decide a woman is 'special', hence the mismatch in 'commitment time'. A man is the gateway to commitment in the sense that he is the bottleneck in the system (he just takes longer to get there, LOL).
So... unfortunately, women are subject to stereotype. I reckon if a man wrote the post above, it would have been much harsher than mine :-)
So surely we have to factor this into our 'strategy', no?
How to overcome this little hitch? How can City girl distance herself from her unfortunate stereotype?
Somehow, acting like Miss Rural doesn't quite cut it, because like you say, it is when you are 'at home' that you do that. An unmarried woman's 'at home' time is not on display to a potential suitor (unless they live together).

Any advice?

@ Danny,

"The women are completely irrellavant."

LOL.
Mate, this is the kind of comment that gets men the death penalty on Planet Woman, or at least life imprisonment :-)
You however, get away with it all the time because you are a lovable rogue, a Navy golden boy, a cordon bleu chef and you are also Brody's Dad.
:-)
Some guys have all the luck...

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveler:

How can City girl distance herself from her unfortunate stereotype?
Somehow, acting like Miss Rural doesn't quite cut it, because like you say, it is when you are 'at home' that you do that. An unmarried woman's 'at home' time is not on display to a potential suitor (unless they live together).

My reply:

Have a veneer of rural girl in the midst of the city girl life? Modest clothing, but not dowdy...? Made up, but not too much?

How about a new category to balance out the two, Ms. Small town/suburban/college town?

There are some rural environments that are more like suburbs and small towns/cities. The aesthetic looks more down-to-earth and rural, but people live a bit more like the big city in terms of attractions. A veneer of the big city look might not look too unusual.

It just seems that there can be more and more overlap. People might live in a rural environment, but they are five miles away from bigger towns and cities, or 2 hours away from the hub. Case in point: Western Massachusetts and Boston.

PVW

dannyfrom504 said...

Well, it doesn't hurt that I'm cute as all hell.

Spacetraveller said...

@ PVW,

Oh yes! You are right: There should have been a third category all along! Miss Small town!
:-)

I actually currently live in a small town myself.
But since there are no cows in my immediate vinity, I self-identifed as 'City girl'.

But I see your general point. Which, I think is, it is not the location that makes the girl, it is the girl that makes the location, or something to that effect :-)

Reminds me of the saying, 'You can take the girl out of the city but you can't take the city out of the girl'.


@ Danny,

Hahaha!!!
Incorrigible, you are...

dannyfrom504 said...

Lol. Am I wrong Love?

Spacetraveller said...

Danny,

"Am I wrong Love?"

What are you doing, Danny?

Whilst everyone else rolls their eyes with the distinct feeling of nausea, can I just remind you politely: The King does not need confirmation of his erm, attributes. You wrote the Rulebook, remember?

Congratulations, Your Majesty, you just made me declare something that now sees all the commenters and lurkers reaching for the sick bowl.



What would His Highness like for dinner?

:-)

dannyfrom504 said...

my original comment wasn't that women are irrelevant, but that the place i decide to dwell is more important than the women the live in the area. i've always lived based on the notion that women are the appetizer, NOT entree' of my life.

so i'll live in the city or country or city based on what's best for ME, not based on which has the women i think are best.

and thanks for the compliment Love. and YES, i do know i get away with a LOT that most men can't pull off. lol.

i'm well aware of my good fortune. lol.

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveller said...


Who is more appealing to men?

The one that wants to appeal to men.

Who is the better prospect for marriage in a man's eyes?

The one that finds the the man she wants.

Who is likely to get married first?

The one that is ready to marry, first.

Who is likely to stay married?

The one that can compromise best on the things that are of lesser importance, and also stay committed to her principles and vows.

To carry Danny's point forward... these thoughts about rural vs urban are of little use, except to those who have never been outside of where they grew up. Cowgirls are definitely NOT big city girls, but that does not mean any particular man could not find a cowgirl worth marrying. It also means that a city or small town female might find herself attracting attention from any given male.

The absolute value of masculinity or femininity of a human being rarely depends on where they live, or grew up. The relative quality of said gender characteristics is much more dependent on that locale, but is also going to attract (or repel) certain types of people of the opposite gender. More than once, I was jokingly referred to as the 'savage', as much for my ancestry as for my old fashioned values.

Again, the point is that looking for Mr or Miss Right really should not be based solely, or largely, on their current residency. Women are women, men are men, and vive la différence!

Yes, a girl raised in the country can probably grow her own garden of vegetables and flowers far better than a girl raised in a city of five million people, and a city girl is probably better at hosting a formal dinner than one raised in a town of 300.

Certainly, men look for those attributes in marriageable women, but as individual attributes of varying importance, not as part where she lives. A guy who owns a large ranch is less likely to marry a city woman, and a CEO of a corporation rarely meets country girls. This is, however, not the way guys approach it. Men know that there are country girls who don't like country life, and the same for citychicks. It's far far more important to see where her interests are, city or country, and compare them to his own.

Last week, I was in a big city (for me it was big, some 100,000 people) and I met a guy who had just completed an adoption of a young child, a boy, with the express purpose of raising the boy with no intent of marrying, ever. His most salient point on marriage was that he was not about to risk his ranch or his life's work to get a wife who might take both, AND ANY CHILDREN, away from him. His reasoning was that he himself has no need for a wife, and that he had utter confidence in his ability to raise a son by himself. Aside from the staggering ego that such a declaration would require, I had to admit that he has some very good points. The ranch he owns has been in his family since 1850. There is real risk in marrying any woman today, to that land.

The conclusions he makes may not be ones I fully agree with, but I cannot fault that they may actually work, for him. He also admitted that he would far prefer to be married and raise his own blood, but that the risks outweigh the benefits by far too much. He has chosen to go his own way, and today's society has no problem allowing single women or men, to adopt and raise a child. I can see this becoming far more common as more and more men decide that marriage is just not worth it, including big city CEOs and country bumpkins.

The Navy Corpsman

Spacetraveller said...

@ Danny,

:-)

@ NC,

Wise words, as usual.
Thank you.

The man you mention, who has adopted a son...
Although society is not filled with this scenario (at least not yet) I can't help feeling sorry for the little boy who will not have his own mother.
How is this different from Single motherhood by choice?
Many men have become great single fathers, and I am yet to hear of children of single fathers being tearaways. But the numbers are few, and it is not something that a man would normally choose (it could of course happen, eg death of wife, most commonly in childbirth).

Do you know if there is a female around to play the mother-figure role? And how old is this child?
I find this story quite sad, somehow...

dannyfrom504 said...

I've actually considered adopting a boy.

Seriously. I don't want to have to deal with tr fallout of a divorce.

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveler:

But I see your general point. Which, I think is, it is not the location that makes the girl, it is the girl that makes the location, or something to that effect :-)

My reply:

Yes, something to that effect, that we work within the parameters we are given.

I thought about that today; I went to the annual meeting of a diocesan group I'm a member of. I thought for a moment, if I were looking, how would I present myself?

Now this group is one that draws primarily women in my age group and older, so it wasn't an arena for those looking.

But what if I were the young female curate, fresh out of seminary, like the former Roman Catholic seminary student who hit the wall of ordination and then "crossed the Tiber? She went to an Episcopal seminary and got a certificate in Anglican Studies, enabling her to become an Episcopal priest.

How does she dress for diocesan convention, where she will be among her peers? How does she dress for functions at her church? How does she dress outside of church?

Talk about being on display--are there clergymen checking her out? Laymen who wouldn't mind dating a female minister? Are the women expecting her to be ultra conservative and provide an example?

Of course, she is expected to wear clericals, the shirts with the collar. The Anglican collar looks more like a turtleneck.

Yet, it is interesting, that I don't seem to see too many clergywomen wearing the more feminine clericals. Some might wear the traditional black and might wear something else with it, a bit of color, maybe. They don't seem to wear makeup.

But what of wearing clericals in light blue? Green? Pink? Grey? Light makeup?

I sometimes see women wearing the ultra-traditional male version of the clerical shirt--the collar Roman Catholic priests tend to wear...I do a double take when I see it. It is just not as feminine, I think.


PVW

Spacetraveller said...

@ Danny,

Really?
But you already have a son - Brody!!

@ PVW,

Yes I imagine it would be hard to maintain a 'feminine exterior' in a cassock!
Perhaps one could try Miss Marie's suggestion and add pink shoes :-)

Have you ever seen British comedy 'The Vicar of Dibley' starring Dawn French, in which she plays a female vicar?
In one episode she wears sexy clothes to church, and her congregation have trouble recognising their own priest!
It was very funny :-)

dannyfrom504 said...

ST-
True dat. Do you watch your video of him once on a while? Lol. How cute is he? And he told me to tell you hello and he misses you btw.

Spacetraveller said...

@ Danny,

I do!
;-)
Tell him I miss him too!

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveller said...

"How is this different from Single motherhood by choice?"

Not by much, if anything at all. And will the father raise his son to detest women? This sort of thing worries me, not because it is new, but because it breaks essential societal and civilizing bonds between people. If we wanted anarchy, we're certainly on that road.

The rancher's parents are both still alive, and both live on the ranch, so there is a grandmother. Like I said, I just met the guy, so I don't know much more than this. In both female and male single adoptions, I understand the reasons behind the decision, but I wonder if any of them have considered the needs of the children involved.

Back on topic, city or country, I don't think either are defining characteristics as much as the way a person is raised, which admittedly could be dependent on where they live. Besides, if you're male, a young lady in a pair of cut-off shorts raises the blood pressure no matter where she lives.

The Navy Corpsman

dannyfrom504 said...

Good, I'd hate to have filmed it for nothing.

Besides, he absolutely adores you.

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveler:

Yes I imagine it would be hard to maintain a 'feminine exterior' in a cassock!
Perhaps one could try Miss Marie's suggestion and add pink shoes :-)

Have you ever seen British comedy 'The Vicar of Dibley' starring Dawn French, in which she plays a female vicar?
In one episode she wears sexy clothes to church, and her congregation have trouble recognising their own priest!
It was very funny :-)

My reply:

It's funny that you mentioned cassocks. I know one young female curate who works at a more conservative-leaning Anglo-Catholic parish. She is the only female priest whom I have ever seen wear a cassock. She wears hers with mary janes, though--that is her feminine, girly approach.

I've never seen a clergywoman wearing pink shoes!

My current priest is an older grandmother type; she worked in the fashion industry as a younger woman, she was an illustrator.

So she is very stylish! Yesterday, she work a grey clerical blouse, blue jacket, blue flowered skirt and navy blue pumps, very feminine, very much in the mode of spring....Next to no makeup, or very light, it wasn't noticeable.

That is as stylish as I have ever seen. Actually, maybe not.

I once visited another conservative-leaning Anglo-Catholic parish, but this is interesting, in the big city, in light of your post here.

The female deacon wore her alb with a chasuble. Her feminine touch--she was wearing heavier makeup and stilettos--definitely a city girl look.

I can't sey I've seen the show you mentioned; I'll have to look for it.

PVW

Spacetraveller said...

@ Danny,

:-)


@ PVW,

I guess with a little bit of imagination, anything is possible!

Somehow, on medical sitcoms, even the surgical attire as worn by female medics can be made to look attractive...

In the UK, female police officers have the choice to wear skirts. But I tell you, they are the most unflattering skirts you have ever seen. No wonder most of them opt for trousers!

Tricky with a female priest though...I guess the ideal is not to draw attention to themselves... so 'sexy' is out and 'dowdy' is in.

Hm, is this why the Catholic Church won't ordain women?
:-)

Anonymous said...

Spacetraveler:

Tricky with a female priest though...I guess the ideal is not to draw attention to themselves... so 'sexy' is out and 'dowdy' is in.


My reply:

Or not....sexy, to me, might mean a tight sweater dress (with clericals) reaching more than an inch or so above the knee. Stillettos, fancy stockings and too much makeup, These would look too sexy on a priest.

Dowdy: black clerical shirt with long black skirt a few inches above the ankles and black flats, ie. loafers--looking almost like a nun.

Attractive lots of possibilities: clerical blouse in a feminine color; nice accessories--earrings, bracelet, pins; light makeup; skirt or dress at the knee or an inch or two below; black clerical blouse with a bright sweater or blazer; attractive scarves in bright colors; tailored slacks; skirts in attractive patterns and colors; feminine suits; plain stockings; pumps with a 2 inch heel.

A perfect example, "What Not to Wear" did an intervention on a 20-something Episcopal priest.

http://my-manner-of-life.blogspot.com/2010/02/young-episcopal-priest-on-what-not-to.html

pvw

Anonymous said...

Here is the link...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3Xma2X5850

pvw

Spacetraveller said...

@ PVW,

Thank you so much for that link!
I really enjoyed this!
Those religion-based jokes were sure coming thick and fast, weren't they?
Very comical episode.
:-)

I think Emily is such a beautiful, intelligent person. I find her very logical and clear in her thinking.
My favourite part is when she has her hair done, and she sees her own beauty, perhaps for the very first time. She looks like she is about to cry, and the hairdresser was such a nice man too...

On a side note, Emily is the embodiment of the type of young woman I had in mind in the post 'What is your end-point?'.
Of note is that to extremists of The Manosphere, women like her don't exist.
'Cos they are all out there whoring themselves out to the highest bidder, or something to that effect.

This is what I wrote in 'What is your end-point?':

"The so-called 'masculine woman' (not the 'sex-positive' variety of course - there is a difference between a high sex drive and promiscuity) is the one most likely to give the second answer to the above question.
She is the 'good woman' the men are looking for.

But where is she?

Precisely because of her thinking, she refuses to dress like Kim K. She refuses to appear so-called 'feminine' because she is disgusted at what 'feminine women' do. She is often very principled, she may even be fiercely religious or spiritual, but none of that is getting picked up by anyone, let alone her intended target.
She is not completely right in her thinking, of course.

She has a lot to learn from the 'feminine woman'.
If only she will outwardly display her femininity which is buried under all that 'masculine thinking', and therefore become more visible to men, she will be a 'winner takes all'.

In the same way as the 'beta' man with real character can learn 'Game' to become visible to women.
These two groups of people are not visible to each other because they are missing an essential ingredient in their gameplan. They are missing the chance to get their foot in the door, so to speak."


I think this more or less describes Emily.
And I am so happy for her that she has learned to make herself more outwardly feminine. Because now she can add 'sizzle' to her 'steak'. And for sure, it's good steak.

Emily's problem was perhaps her previously dowdy appearance, and maybe a little bit to do with some overweight (she doesn't need to lose much). Once that is fixed, she should have no problems meeting and keeping a very good guy.

Thanks for this, PVW.
A lot of food for thought here.

Anonymous said...

Hi, Spacetraveler,

I'm so glad you liked it. The religious jokes were coming through fast and furious, it is true.

I agree, she is the type of woman the manosphere believes doesn't exist. I agree, she might be high t in a positive sense, and with learning how to present herself better and with a loss of weight, she had a foundation for things to come together.

A serious young woman, dealing with serious things...Here is a sermon she gave recently:

http://www.trinitywallstreet.org/webcasts/videos/browse/sermons/the-rev-emily-bloemker

PVW

Spacetraveller said...

@ PVW,

Another gem, this sermon!
I agree there aren't many 26 year olds quite like this one...
She makes me feel like I am much younger than her, because she is so so grown up :-)

But there are many serious young women approaching her level of maturity.
They are just invisible (at least to the opposite sex) because they aren't 'hot' enough.

Hopefully they will learn to increase their attractiveness without becoming 'tarty'.