Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article

from AnnaH Friday, January 05, 2007 - 10:18 (Agree/Disagree?) I'm interested to know what exactly Jon Waters did. He was my brother-in-law, married to my sister Joy. They split up, because of his "flirting" which I know now was probably a lot more that. I always liked him, he was really nice to me. But then again I was ten years old so what did I know? (reply to this comment)

from Mir Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 15:00 (Agree/Disagree?) Girls, I really feel for you. I remember when I was a JETT "shepherdess" (I was only 16) I used to feel guilty about having to be so damn strict all the time. Well, I didn't last long. I asked the adults if we could go to the park together sometimes and have a milkshake but they refused. When I saw that if I stuck around I would turn into a FGA ARSEHOLE I left. You are right about some of the teen boys- I remember working my ASS off and the boys always got the best food, the hot water and all the privileges. Some of them were the biggest sadist I have ever come across, taking great delight in producing weapons to beat other kids with. That freaked me out. Well done for leaving, you are very brave. Good luck ladies, take care of yourselves. Mir (reply to this comment)

from Jules Thursday, February 06, 2003 - 13:28 (Agree/Disagree?) In what has to be the biggest JJT ever, I am trying to sort out some of the more convoluted threads. Charity and Shaenock raised some interesting points in these posts, so I have moved them into an article. (If you ladies would just chill a bit, you being restricted to the trailer park could be temporary). (reply to this comment)

from PompousJohn Monday, January 27, 2003 - 12:18 (Agree/Disagree?) I understand how you feel, and believe me, I have my own list of "people I would like to murder some day" I also know it's tempting to try to take the frustrations out on everybody that remotely resembles the people who hurt us, but you can't give into that reasoning, that is the kind of reasoning bigotry is based on. i.e. "single white male "a" did x to me so single white male "b" cannot be trusted" you can replace the words single, white, and male with whatever describes your abuser, but in the end your being unfair to that group based on experiences with someone else, or in this case based on someone else's husband's claims about someone else. Do you see what I mean? (reply to this comment)

From Jules Monday, January 27, 2003, 12:25 (Agree/Disagree?) Uhhh PJ, while I agree with you regarding bigotry, wasn’t this your own train of logic regarding women who sleep with “successful” men? (reply to this comment)

From PompousJohn Monday, January 27, 2003, 12:41 (Agree/Disagree?) Jules, I thought I clarified this. I was flame-baiting when I wrote that and I was hoping to anger my opponents, since people can't argue as convincingly when they are outraged, and tend to set themselves up for some easy comebacks. I know the way I worded it was inflammatory, I worded it that way intentionally. Since I don’t ever plan on running for office, I can live with the consequences of speaking my mind. To answer your question though, I don't see the connection between my logic train and the one attribute to Shaenock. Perhaps you could expound? (reply to this comment)

From Jules Monday, January 27, 2003, 13:04 (Agree/Disagree?) Even someone who "gets laid all the time" couldn't possibly have slept with more than a very small percentage of all women in the world, so to base a blanket statement about all women on your own experiences with them is the same faulty logic that you are saying Shaenock is using. Regarding the flame-baiting, were you speaking your mind or trying to offend her (and other women reading your comments while you were at it)? And isn't this exactly the point Shaenock is trying to make? That people should take responsiblity for their own irresponsible behaviour, not just claim "the woman enticed (provoked/seduced/annoyed) me..."?(reply to this comment)

From PompousJohn Monday, January 27, 2003, 14:03 (Agree/Disagree?) When someone goes from "never getting laid at all" to "getting laid all the time" they witness an increase in the percentage of the population that is willing to sleep with them. If sex is important to them, they may seek to draw conclusions by examining what changed to bring about their increased popularity. It seems logical to conclude that if 3 out of 10 potential sex partners interviewed in Dallas were willing to sleep with person "a" and 0 out of 10 were willing to sleep with person "b" Then person "a" also has a better chance of getting laid in LA, Anchorage and Tokyo than person "b". Obviously, it is not necessary for a specimen to sleep with everybody in order to establish its relative attractiveness. As for the second part of your answer, while it may be argued that what I said was “wrong”, I don’t hear anybody saying it was “false”. This is what I meant by taking it at face value. How many women would rather have a slacker than a winner? Enough to encourage men to “slack” in order to attract women? I don’t think so. Even on the Discovery Channel, it’s the winners who get laid, male or female, depending on the situation one gets to choose, and the other has to prove him or herself worthy. I am getting tired of tip-toeing around issues that are potentially inflammatory, and incidentally while many who left the Family long ago may remember it as a male-dominated patriarchal chauvinist’s paradise, I for one could tell for a long time that Zerby was running the show for a long time before Berg checked out. Think about rules like “no blue-jeans allowed”, “Oh Yeah” and “oh man” being bad words, no watching sports, no drinking beer, no lifting weights (but aerobics are ok) not to mention the ridiculous list of terms that were sanctioned for referring to private parts. Who remembers the horrible “MOM” team? My life in the family was hell, and most of the little demons running around jabbing me in the ass with pitch-forks were women, either premenstrual teens or menopausal aunties, it was an Amazonian nightmare, and if I ended up a little callous toward female sensitivities as a result that’s just something the world will have to deal with, I try to be as understanding as possible of all the horror stories of abusive men, and I’m willing to stand up for anyone I feel is being mistreated even at great expense to myself but when it comes down to a pitched battle of the sexes I am still a man and don’t expect that to change any time soon. (reply to this comment)

From Jules Monday, January 27, 2003, 14:34 (Agree/Disagree?) Then does your comment above: "I also know it's tempting to try to take the frustrations out on everybody that remotely resembles the people who hurt us, but you can't give into that reasoning, that is the kind of reasoning bigotry is based on" only apply to women? I am saying that your statement is false. There are many different things that different women find attractive, including confidence. If a man is insecure reaching a level of success can also bring confidence, and with it sexual attractiveness that was not previously there. I have no idea if this was the case with you, but my point is that there are other factors to consider, not just "success". Here's something else to think about. Sometimes some men are attracted to women that they can dominate. A woman who is less educated, financially dependant or significantly younger can provide the reassurance of masculinity an insecure man is looking for. I don't think anyone on this web site ever tiptoes around controversial issues. I'd like to think we can discuss a topic and see it as just a debate. Some women in the Family were pretty nasty to the girls as well. They were much more petty, spiteful and sometimes more cruel than the men. (reply to this comment)

From PompousJohn Monday, January 27, 2003, 14:59 (Agree/Disagree?) I'm not taking out frustrations on anyone, Jules, just sticking up for a friend of mine - in a discussion that has escalated to...this. You're saying that different women find different things attractive, and you mention confidence, but wouldn't you concur that confidence is usually found in people who are aware of their own competence? In order for the confidence to be real, the competence must also be real. Let’s use “competent” instead of “successful”, the latter has gotten to be something of a cliché that doesn’t always seem to imply the same thing. I don’t think you’re referring to men whose self-confidence is actually overconfidence with nothing to back it up, are you? Ayn Rand said that luxury and competence are inseparable, and I agree with her, also I believe the ability to choose high quality sex partners is a luxury. She also said that men who sleep with women who are (copying and pasting from you) “less educated, financially dependant or significantly younger” secretly despise themselves. Obviously this does not apply to men who are uneducated, broke and, young themselves, but even so, if she’s right then there seems to be an abundance of men who despise themselves in the world. There also seems to be an abundance of women who are “less educated, financially dependant or significantly younger” than they are. (reply to this comment)

From Jules Monday, January 27, 2003, 18:48 (Agree/Disagree?) Men (and women) find many things they are competent in and therefore feel confident about. Personality traits, physical attributes, material possessions, personal achievements, social status, as examples, are all things that different people value in themselves and others in varying ways. The reality of competence is in the eye of the beholder, (and mindset of the possessor). I can’t speak for all men, but having worked as a professional escort I would say that men that need the validation of women they deem to be deferential in some regards do secretly despise themselves. My clients saw women (and status, fame or material possessions) as accessories, which they piled on as women might makeup or clothes. It was part of the package that they displayed to the world and without which they felt naked and unattractive. Having a young, attractive woman on their arm was a way to wear their virility on their sleeve and impress other men. I think there are an abundance of men that despise themselves, which I think, is due to the shallowness of our society. Power, wealth and status are held out as requirements for masculinity, when the reality is that very few will ever achieve this. Something else I was thinking about is that sometimes our lifestyle influences our view of the world. In my previous lifestyle, the majority of men I met on a daily basis were rude, deceptive, chauvinistic and aggressive. Not having had much experience with men in the real world, I thought that was pretty much how it went and “all men were pigs”. On the other side of the coin most of the women were manipulative and saw men as easy marks, as I did myself. Having the opportunity now to work in and interact with a different sector of society, I find the majority of men I meet to be kind, honest and loyal to their family and friends. Most of the women are intelligent, sincere and self-sufficient. (reply to this comment)

From TimR Monday, January 27, 2003, 18:37 (Agree/Disagree?) I have a theory about this: The problem is that we have two different valuable Human conditions, Wealth and Beauty. Wealth is distributed with no regard to Beauty, and Beauty is distributed with no regard for Wealth. The result is that you inevitably end up with unattractive Wealthy people and poor Beautiful people. These two groups will meet and in accordance with the time-honored law of Supply and Demand, they will exchange valuables. In my opinion, this can happen with any gender combination. Men are more likely to brag about their bimbos. Women, by comparison, are generaly more discreet about their "himbos". There are some people who see beauty as inherently good. Not me, I think the ancient Greeks were full of shit. Truth is often ugly. How is being born beautiful any different than being born rich? A rich kid may not deserve their fortune, but you can't say a beautiful person "deserves" to be attractive either. All in all, just take the hand that life gives you and play it the best you can.(reply to this comment)

From niniva. Monday, April 21, 2003, 10:14 (Agree/Disagree?) nice one! (reply to this comment)