From the whorses mouth..

[AdTheBad]

Checkout this bitch, Rachel Cusk whores her book wherein she publicly crucifies her ex, Adrian Clarke (lawyer and photographer) for becoming house husband so she could pursue her career. Basically she wound up despising him. I dont even feel sorry for the bloke. I am posting as an example of the many things encapsulated on this hallowed forum.
Just a thought though, she has no feelings of humane mercy, dignity, respect towards those close to her. How much more would she hate and despise the checkout woman, postie, sparky, cop,nurse, bin man,cleaner,waitress etc.
I fear people such as this woman.






Heavily redacted excerpts:
--------------

My husband said that he wanted half of everything, including the children.

No, I said.

What do you mean no, he said.

You can't divide people in half, I said.

They should be with me half the time, he said.

They're my children, I said. They belong to me.

------------>


For me, to act as a mother, I had to suspend my own character. I was aware, in those early days of motherhood, that my behaviour was strange to the people who knew me well. It was as though I had been brainwashed, taken over by a cult religion.

And yet this cult, motherhood, was not a place where I could actually live. Like any cult, it demanded a complete surrender of identity to belong to it. So for a while I didn't belong anywhere. As the mother of young children I was homeless, drifting, itinerant. And I felt an inadmissible pity for myself and for my daughters in those years. It seemed, almost, catastrophic to me, the disenchantment of this contact with womanhood.

And so I conscripted my husband into care of the children. My notion was that we would live together as two hybrids, each of us half male and half female. He gave up his law job, and I gave up the exclusivity of my primitive maternal right over the children. These were our preparatory sacrifices to the new gods, whose future protection we hoped to live under. Ten years later, sitting in a solicitor's office on a noisy main road in north London, my maternalism did indeed seem primitive to me, almost barbaric.

The children belong to me – this was not the kind of rudimentary phrase-making I generally went in for. Yet it was the only thought in my head, there in the chrome and glass office, with the petite solicitor in tailored black sitting opposite. She told me I was obliged to support my husband financially, possibly for ever. But he's a qualified lawyer, I said. And I'm just a writer. What I meant was, he's a man. And I'm just a woman.

What I need is a wife, jokes the stressed-out feminist career woman, and everyone laughs. The joke is that the feminist's pursuit of male values has led her to the threshold of female exploitation. I had hated my husband's unwaged domesticity just as much as I had hated my mother's; and he, like her, had claimed to be contented with his lot.

Why had I hated it so? Because it represented dependence. But there was more to it than that, for it might be said that dependence is an agreement between two people. My father depended on my mother too: he couldn't cook a meal, or look after children from the office. They were two halves that made up a whole. What, morally speaking, is half a person? Yet the two halves were not the same: in a sense my parents were a single compartmentalised human being. My father's half was very different from my mother's, but despite the difference neither half made any sense on its own. So it was in the difference that the problem lay.

My notion of half was more like the earthworm's: you cut it in two, but each half remains an earthworm, wriggling and fending for itself. I earned the money in our household, did my share of the cooking and cleaning, paid someone to look after the children while I worked, picked them up from school once they were older. And my husband helped. It was his phrase, and still is: he helped me. I was the compartmentalised modern woman, the woman having it all, and he helped me to be it, to have it. But I didn't want help: I wanted equality. In fact, this idea of help began to annoy me.

Why couldn't we be the same? Why couldn't he be compartmentalised too? And why, exactly, was it helpful for a man to look after his own children, or cook the food that he himself would eat? Helpful is what a good child is to its mother. A helpful person is someone who performs duties outside their own sphere of responsibility, out of the kindness of their heart.

Help is dangerous because it exists outside the human economy: the only payment for help is gratitude. And did I not have something of the same gratuitous tone where my wage-earning was concerned? Did I not think there was something awfully helpful about me, a woman, supporting my own family?
-------------->
Except that I did both things, was both man and woman, while my husband – meaning well – only did one. Once, a female friend confessed to me that she admired our life but couldn't have lived it herself. She admitted the reason – that she would no longer respect her husband if he became a wife.

sources:
Rachel Cusk on the end of a marriage - Telegraph
Rachel Cusk: 'Divorce is only darkness' | Books | The Guardian

[Sam I Am]

+1 rep for an outstanding thread title....

[Dj_mgtow]

Agreed. Sounds like the ramblings of a nutjob, I don't understand what point she's trying to make. Effing lunatic.

[Sam I Am]

Bottom line... this was a crazy, narcissistic/histrionic woman who, at the time, was probably a "struggling writer" who saw her opportunity to marry a lawyer..

And she had big dreams of being rich and SAHM....

So she was living in a world of UNreality and then she got fucking ideological all of a sudden, magically believing that she could (and needed) to pursue a career, and that hubby could at least partially be a SAHD...

y'know.. because lawyers are able to magically maintain their salary by doing nothing but having a doctor of jurisprudence lambskin hanging on the wall above the baby's crib....

This is the woman's fault... again.... for living in a world that simply doesn't exist... Thinking that she could cram 200% of activity into a life limited to 100% capacity!

"I only have 100% of life to give... but I want to be 100% career woman and 100% stay at home mom."

This is the mentality of a bunch of bitches out there.... and then, when the lawyer dad is playing SAHD and the money is drying up, she finally realizes that there has been a role reversal... because she doesn't have the actual ability to envision the simple concept that "Hey, if I do a career, then I can't be a SAHM".... no, she actually has to start getting into her career BEFORE she finally realizes she can't be a SAHM anymore.

In other words, with women, it is too often the case of READY - FIRE - AIM !!!

Unfortunately, when these bitches DO come to this realization, they are still wholly incapable of owning up to the fact that THEY are the cause of the problem. THEY put THEMSELVES in that situation.

No.. it's always the man's fault. Even in a best-case scenario, it's the man's fault, because at best, she'll recognize that it was her idea to quit the SAHM and pursue a career, but GOD FUCKING DAMMIT, YOU [hubby] SHOULD HAVE BEEN A MAN AND WARNED ME. YOU SHOULD HAVE EXPLAINED IT TO ME. blah blah blah...

fucking bitches!!! CUNT FUCKHOLE SHIT ASS BITCHES!!

[Spoon]

Fucking hell.

"I wanted kids but I didn't like being a full time mother, even though the children only belong to me, so I forced my husband to take full time care of the children while I worked. But then I started hating him because I felt cheated that had to support the family, especially since I had made the effort to marry a lawyer who should have taken care of me. Him being the man and all."

They want their own careers and full control over children but they also want the man to be on the hook for supporting her in perpetuity while he also puts in half of the domestic work. But I'm sure she could find something to bitch about in that situation too.

A woman will bitch.

The children belong to me – this was not the kind of rudimentary phrase-making I generally went in for. Yet it was the only thought in my head, there in the chrome and glass office, with the petite solicitor in tailored black sitting opposite.

This is why you do not have children. You are not part of the family. You are simply the companion to the head female of the family. You can be removed at any time. Though you will still have your property taken from you to support a family that you were never a part of.

[Jso]

whenever a man does what a woman tells him to do, she ends up despising him and he ends up despising himself

the lesson is: don't pay any attention to what women tell you

[downandout]

For me, to act as a mother, I had to suspend my own character. I was aware, in those early days of motherhood, that my behaviour was strange to the people who knew me well. It was as though I had been brainwashed, taken over by a cult religion.

And yet this cult, motherhood, was not a place where I could actually live. Like any cult, it demanded a complete surrender of identity to belong to it. So for a while I didn't belong anywhere. As the mother of young children I was homeless, drifting, itinerant. And I felt an inadmissible pity for myself and for my daughters in those years. It seemed, almost, catastrophic to me, the disenchantment of this contact with womanhood.

And so I conscripted my husband into care of the children. My notion was that we would live together as two hybrids, each of us half male and half female. He gave up his law job, and I gave up the exclusivity of my primitive maternal right over the children. These were our preparatory sacrifices to the new gods, whose future protection we hoped to live under. Ten years later, sitting in a solicitor's office on a noisy main road in north London, my maternalism did indeed seem primitive to me, almost barbaric.

The children belong to me – this was not the kind of rudimentary phrase-making I generally went in for. Yet it was the only thought in my head, there in the chrome and glass office, with the petite solicitor in tailored black sitting opposite. She told me I was obliged to support my husband financially, possibly for ever. But he's a qualified lawyer, I said. And I'm just a writer. What I meant was, he's a man. And I'm just a woman.

What I need is a wife, jokes the stressed-out feminist career woman, and everyone laughs. The joke is that the feminist's pursuit of male values has led her to the threshold of female exploitation. I had hated my husband's unwaged domesticity just as much as I had hated my mother's; and he, like her, had claimed to be contented with his lot.

Why had I hated it so? Because it represented dependence. But there was more to it than that, for it might be said that dependence is an agreement between two people. My father depended on my mother too: he couldn't cook a meal, or look after children from the office. They were two halves that made up a whole. What, morally speaking, is half a person? Yet the two halves were not the same: in a sense my parents were a single compartmentalised human being. My father's half was very different from my mother's, but despite the difference neither half made any sense on its own. So it was in the difference that the problem lay.

My notion of half was more like the earthworm's: you cut it in two, but each half remains an earthworm, wriggling and fending for itself. I earned the money in our household, did my share of the cooking and cleaning, paid someone to look after the children while I worked, picked them up from school once they were older. And my husband helped. It was his phrase, and still is: he helped me. I was the compartmentalised modern woman, the woman having it all, and he helped me to be it, to have it. But I didn't want help: I wanted equality. In fact, this idea of help began to annoy me.

Why couldn't we be the same? Why couldn't he be compartmentalised too? And why, exactly, was it helpful for a man to look after his own children, or cook the food that he himself would eat? Helpful is what a good child is to its mother. A helpful person is someone who performs duties outside their own sphere of responsibility, out of the kindness of their heart.

Help is dangerous because it exists outside the human economy: the only payment for help is gratitude. And did I not have something of the same gratuitous tone where my wage-earning was concerned? Did I not think there was something awfully helpful about me, a woman, supporting my own family?
-------------->
Except that I did both things, was both man and woman, while my husband – meaning well – only did one. Once, a female friend confessed to me that she admired our life but couldn't have lived it herself. She admitted the reason – that she would no longer respect her husband if he became a wife.

Let me translate this for those of you who can't speak female:

I'm an uppity bitch, and when I shit-tested my husband about him quitting his work to raise the kids, I expected him to turn me around, smack my ass, and fuck me doggie style. Instead he respected my opinion, and for that I must divorce him.

[bob]

Once, a female friend confessed to me that she admired our life but couldn't have lived it herself. She admitted the reason – that she would no longer respect her husband if he became a wife.

If the man is not the alpha of his own pack, (family), he is often doomed. Female hypergamy virtually demands that the man be the alpha dog.

[sLiPpY]

From the article, "The children belong to me – this was not the kind of rudimentary phrase-making I generally went in for. Yet it was the only thought in my head, there in the chrome and glass office, with the petite solicitor in tailored black sitting opposite. She told me I was obliged to support my husband financially, possibly for ever. But he's a qualified lawyer, I said. And I'm just a writer. What I meant was, he's a man. And I'm just a woman."

Why is it not surprising that in the end; the woman didn't want to "cunt-up" for feminist.

[logic101]

She told me I was obliged to support my husband financially, possibly for ever. But he's a qualified lawyer, I said. And I'm just a writer. What I meant was, he's a man. And I'm just a woman."

I'm wondering how many times this guy had to listen to her

***If he were a truly smart man he would have never gotten involved with her in the first place. Most married men/nice guys settle for so little today and frequently get CRAP and a depreciating asset in the end.

Logic101

[IHITTEMANDRUN]

Disregard females, acquire currency.

[yojimbo]

In other words, with women, it is too often the case of READY - FIRE - AIM !!!

Oh man I love this board. Such brilliance even from an F-Bomb Dropping Monkey....touche!!!

[downandout]

If the man is not the alpha of his own pack, (family), he is often doomed. Female hypergamy virtually demands that the man be the alpha dog.

And yet when a man marries, he automatically becomes beta no matter what status he had before.

In the US, the "alpha" husband can huff and puff all he wants, but he is always a phone call away from getting thrown out of his house (VAWA) and he is a divorce filing away from losing most of what he has. Any power the husband has is granted to him by his wife, and she can take it away from him at any time. Like you said, women are not attracted to powerless guys, so go figure the divorce rate is what it is.

[Sam I Am]

From the article, "The children belong to me – this was not the kind of rudimentary phrase-making I generally went in for. Yet it was the only thought in my head, there in the chrome and glass office, with the petite solicitor in tailored black sitting opposite. She told me I was obliged to support my husband financially, possibly for ever. But he's a qualified lawyer, I said. And I'm just a writer. What I meant was, he's a man. And I'm just a woman."

Why is it not surprising that in the end; the woman didn't want to "cunt-up" for feminist.

I like that.... "cunt up" vs. "woman up" ......

"bitch up" might be a viable alternative as well.... just sayin'.

+1 rep for the good idea, bro.

[Sam I Am]

And yet when a man marries, he automatically becomes beta no matter what status he had before.

In the US, the "alpha" husband can huff and puff all he wants, but he is always a phone call away from getting thrown out of his house (VAWA) and he is a divorce filing away from losing most of what he has. Any power the husband has is granted to him by his wife, and she can take it away from him at any time. Like you said, women are not attracted to powerless guys, so go figure the divorce rate is what it is.

100% right.
It doesn't matter how alpha a guy is.... once he gets married, the possibility of NO FAULT DIVORCE makes him beta.


...well wait a second. that might not be necessarily true in all cases, because I guess you might be alpha enough to have no job, plenty of tattoos, no money, no house, no car, no nothing.... and as long as you don't get the whore pregnant, you might still be good to go.

then again... this is all horseshit, because ... well.... do alphas even get married anymore?

[yojimbo]

then again... this is all horseshit, because ... well.... do alphas even get married anymore?

No.....it is nearly impossible to stay married as an alpha in the West. The truth is your wife is useless and there will always be prettier. And there will always be women throwing pussy at you. If women throw pussy at married beta's they hand deliver that shit nicely wrapped and smelling like field lillies to an alpha. Over the years my friends who had any alpha in them were always banging multiple chics....girlfriend or no girlfriend.

I think the only way and alpha can stay married for any length of time is to be rich, famous,or a drug dealer. He and the wife come to an understanding. Her hamster will make sense of it no worries. Women are amoral.


Western women are just amoral. When women just come out and offer sex instead of pretending they have something else of value to offer and you see first hand just how low they will sink while presenting a holier than though front to get what they want the idea of getting legally tied to one of these monsters becomes laughable.

As for an alpha getting married and divorced and the woman taking everything I think this is 50/50. I think most of the time the woman will walk away still wanting the guy back and probably still hooking up with him when the opportunity exists. I can't remember the last girlfriend that I did not still bang after the breakup. I outlast the guys who come and go after me. It is usually when the other yentas get together and have a "f*** him girl, make him suffer" convention that she becomes a blood thirsty beast. Having your mother in law on your side is like an ace in the hole. Anyways, this is just from what I have seen. I am here with you guys so "F*** Marriage!!!"

[Superion]

This is a terrific thread as this woman shatters all the myths and lies men have been told to believe.

Women want men to be in charge.

Women do not respect men who cater to them.

Another example is Rhianna and Chris Brown.

[yojimbo]

Another example is Rhianna and Chris Brown.

To mention Rhianna and Chris Brown. I had a laugh driving in the car yesterday they announced the release of Rhianna and Chris Brown's new duet single.

[toadman]

And yet when a man marries, he automatically becomes beta no matter what status he had before.

Nugget. The ring will slide over his now-flaccid cock. Effort may be needed with manipulation lube on her part, but smarter men know the score. It's the altar sacrifice for her wants and needs that makes her attracted to you in the first place. "How much can I make this guy suffer and pine away for my pussy and affections to provide me with what I require for a happy life I can show off?"

You're never truly "loved" in the sense that men define it. A woman is only as faithful as the options available to her at any given point of time. Hypergamy. There's your prescription today. Pay at the counter on the way out. With your joint credit card.

It's really that simple in concept, when dealing with women on the lowest common denominator level they work from.

[Superion]

To mention Rhianna and Chris Brown. I had a laugh driving in the car yesterday they announced the release of Rhianna and Chris Brown's new duet single.

It makes me wonder if their whole "abuse" incident was an attempt to further her career.

She initiated the violence by kicking him in the face with her high heels.

Then she goes into full victim mode.

Her recording sales start to climb.

Her songs focus on abuse and her career sky rockets.

Now she sing songs about S&M and starts dating her "alpha male" again.

Must be a coincidence