The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Roxanne Doesn’t Have To Turn On The Red Lights. She Does Anyway; Dad Didn’t Teach Her Otherwise

Posted on | April 19, 2012 | 29 Comments

by Smitty

No, I don’t mean Roxeanne de Luca specifically. Or prostitution in the Secret Service sense. I mean, emphasis mine:

Now, let’s cut through the drivel: play-acting at being married with someone to whom you have not committed will delay that commitment, or finding the person you really want to commit to. Acting like someone’s wife, when that person has not wed you in front of his family and friends, will just make you feel like you’re in a perpetual audition — because you’re in a perpetual audition. Not to go all Ayn Rand, but you wouldn’t take that from an employer (it would be “hire me, enough already, or I’ll find another job”); why do you take that from a man?

Show me these famous live-in women, and the males perpetuating these arrangements, and I’ll show you some kids playing grown-up.

Irrespective of age, that male is a boy, not a man. Men just don’t use women as protein receptacles. Bill Clinton, I mean you. How many women who eschew marriage had a father (i.e. mature man) in their life?

All I can say is that the World’s Youngest Blogger will be raised to understand that sexuality is not a video game. Have lots of women friends; treat them like sisters. But don’t go trading protein with them as a dog in the street. You might get Cowelled. Wait until the will of the Almighty has been revealed, marry, and enjoy life.

Should I be blessed with a daughter, on the other hand, she’ll be taught to look to the Almighty for self-actualization. No other human can provide such. Dad can only build a daughter up; not even he can do that.

This ‘living together’ noise cannot be mocked too much as yet another aspect of the Postmodern assault on everything of value in our culture. Behaviors that lead to success are mocked, while those that lead to failure are celebrated.


29 Responses to “Roxanne Doesn’t Have To Turn On The Red Lights. She Does Anyway; Dad Didn’t Teach Her Otherwise”

  1. ThePaganTemple
    April 19th, 2012 @ 10:56 am

    Well now there is something to be said for that, and you actually nailed it yourself with the use of the word “audition”. So a woman who wants to get married should “audition” for the job? So what if the “casting director” grants her the “role”, and it turns out to have been just that? A role? Does a roll in the hay turn into some poor chump getting rolled? I’m afraid it does far too often, and in the current judicial climate where the woman is far too often unfairly favored, this can be cause for concern. Maybe not so much in the beginning, but later, when the stage lights are down and the “actress” reveals her true self.

  2. Bob Belvedere
    April 19th, 2012 @ 11:20 am

    Roxe has such a great mind [and is quite the looker] – it’s too bad, like Joy McCann, she refuses to see that ‘conservative feminism’ is an oxymoron.

  3. Pathfinder's wife
    April 19th, 2012 @ 12:03 pm

    Good point about “grownups” playing at being grownup.  Pretending is not the real thing; pretending makes you a fraud — and that’s damaging for everyone concerned.

    We have become so conditioned to value “nice” above anything else, that it is very hard for young people in every area of their lives.  And “nice” is often very, very shallow and the enemy of the good/true.

    That’s how we wind up auditioning to respective mates (and men do it too — they do what they believe is expected of them, same as women, what they believe is wanted; who can blame them considering how things are?).  This makes it doubly hard for anyone who would rather know and tell the truth (which is the basis of a lasting relationship — golden lies notwithstanding, in the long run you either accept somebody warts and all and are accepted in return, or you are not — best to start out with the person you can have mutual acceptance with, usually lasts).  It takes a lot of courage; courage isn’t valued anymore.

  4. ThePaganTemple
    April 19th, 2012 @ 12:11 pm

     Yeah, whatever, but the sad truth is the reason a lot of people get married isn’t because of their “courage”, its because they’re dumb as a box of rocks and such people tend to rush into such things based primarily on “love” (otherwise known as, well, never mind), or frankly because one of them, usually the woman, is looking for a permanent meal ticket. Ironically, the people who do tend to shack up instead of tying the knot would probably have the best marriages if they could find their way to take the plunge. Granted, many of them are maybe a little too cautious, and so tend to drag it out longer than necessary, but I don’t see them as wanting to have their cake and eat it too in all cases. They just grow comfortable in the roles they’ve established and don’t see any reason to change a situation that has served them well.

  5. Pathfinder's wife
    April 19th, 2012 @ 12:16 pm

    And with that, and as a personal aside: let’s all wish my new son-in-law good luck.  He is going for SF selection, and as this is very important to him I hope he makes it.  He has some salt to him, that one, as well as basic decency — so far, in the little time to get to know him, I’m quite happy with my daughter’s choice;they appear to have picked appropriate people for each other.
    So a toast to my son-in-law; wish there were more young men like him. 

  6. Finrod Felagund
    April 19th, 2012 @ 12:36 pm

    Enh.  I’ve been living with the same woman ever since my now-ex-wife and I separated in 2001.  I didn’t push her to get married (current, not ex-wife) because her ex pushed her to get married and that didn’t work out well.  Now we own a house together but I still haven’t gotten around to buying a ring yet.

    If you don’t like my living arrangements, you can talk to the hand, which I’ll be waving with just one finger extended.

  7. ThePaganTemple
    April 19th, 2012 @ 1:24 pm

    In fairness to our old-fashioned host, I don’t think he means to denigrate any individual or couples, his concern is with the far reaching implications for society and marriage in that it has become (actually has been for quite some time) such a common aspect of our culture. Of course I could be wrong and Smitty could just be an old fuddy-duddy wanting to rage at all the young whippersnappers.

  8. Bob Belvedere
    April 19th, 2012 @ 1:33 pm

    No, I think you’re dead-on.

  9. Mark J Dietl
    April 19th, 2012 @ 2:31 pm

    That Evan  Sayet video should be mandatory viewing for all conservatives.

  10. Roxeanne de Luca
    April 19th, 2012 @ 2:45 pm

    Thanks for the link, Smitty.

    Pre-marital cohabitation works for some people, but, on the whole, it works a lot worse than living apart until the nuptials.  You can get into a car accident in a SmartCar and live, or die in an accident in a Volvo, but that hardly means that you’re equally safe in either vehicle. 

    What really irks me is that these allegedly “pro-woman” social reforms have been nothing but good for the worst of men.  

  11. richard mcenroe
    April 19th, 2012 @ 3:08 pm

    Slightly OT, but… is it just me, or has the Wombat been taking a lot of “me time” with our Rule 5 entries?  Maybe we’re doing too good a job?  Is an intervention called for?

  12. Finrod Felagund
    April 19th, 2012 @ 3:36 pm

    You’re probably right; I mostly just wanted to point out that I’m a living counter-example.  Heck, my relationship with my first wife was fine until about a year after we were married, as it turned out.

  13. Pathfinder's wife
    April 19th, 2012 @ 4:04 pm

    Well, that’s the problem — people are very ignorant anymore about what marriage is supposed to entail, or why it’s probably better than co-habitation. No offense Finrod, there is always the special individual case, but most live togethers are that instead of married because even after many years and many pronouncements of love…one or both wanted to leave the door out cracked at least a teeny tiny bit open, which means somebody or both were not truly committed to the partnership or the other person.
    That’s not a very grownup or even decent way to treat another person, nor really oneself.  And that is why, imhao, it usually ends badly for all concerned.
    Now, is that better than a marriage that quickly ends in divorce?  Hard to say — I think both are equally damaging for people and society.  There’s probably no easy answer but to raise our children with the skills to avoid such things as best they can.

    But anyone who tries to shack up with, not marry any of my kids will be finding themselves in an interesting situation…I don’t care if my kid in question thinks they are the one true love (the kid can always find another one).

  14. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 19th, 2012 @ 4:33 pm

    You might want to check this out Bob.  Here are some photographs of the actual girls involved with the agents…

    Bob is a professional so his review of this is important.  Wombat might want to get in on this action  review too.  

  15. daisy
    April 19th, 2012 @ 4:50 pm

    My husband’s cousin auditioned a woman for about five years. He then decided she wasn’t the one, kicked her out and got married to somebody else.

  16. Brian D Paasch
    April 19th, 2012 @ 5:45 pm

    “Not to go all Ayn Rand, but you wouldn’t take that from an employer (it would be “hire me, enough already, or I’ll find another job”)”

    But now-a-days, we do that. I recently went through a contract-to-hire process that was straight out of the depths of hell. Once my bleeding stopped and the bruises sorta healed, I’ve given the new paradigm of temps and contract-to-hire some thought and I came to realize it is a very predictable outcome of our “shacking up” culture. A temp has less standing than the leased copy machine and can, legally, be treated very badly with impunity. Companies are using temps more and more, some almost exclusively, so good luck avoiding that path. “No legal standing and treat ’em as bad as you want” sounds a lot like the “cohabitation” standard operating procedure.

  17. smitty
    April 19th, 2012 @ 6:04 pm

    Have it your way; I hope that your example isn’t used by anyone else to justify their own choices, if they do awry.

  18. smitty
    April 19th, 2012 @ 6:05 pm

    For example, my sister and brother-in-law cohabitated a bit. But the parents on both sides are life-mates.

  19. ThePaganTemple
    April 19th, 2012 @ 8:30 pm

     It’s the governments fault. They do everything they can to make it hard on married couples, especially married couples with children, which is by and large why so many people use contraception and even get abortions, as well as why so many couples elect to just shack up instead of engaging in traditional marriages. It’s hard to blame them.

  20. Quartermaster
    April 19th, 2012 @ 9:35 pm

    Bucking for a rule 5 post?

  21. ThePaganTemple
    April 19th, 2012 @ 9:56 pm

    Oh, thank ya thank ya thank ya.

  22. Bob Belvedere
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:10 am

    Sadly, the hooker appears to have hydraulics installed, which would eliminate her immediately from any consideration by The TCOTS Rule 5 Compliance Committee.

  23. Finrod Felagund
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:24 am

    Personally, I never recommend my lifestyle to anyone.  I’m a mutant, a statistical outlier; what works for me isn’t necessarily likely to work for anyone else.  Or as HST put it: “I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they’ve always worked for me.”

    However, I was overly confrontational in my original post, and you deserve an apology for that.

  24. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:44 am

     Well, in fairness to you as well, go back and re-read Smitty’s post title. He might not have been going out of his way, intending to be provocative and defamatory, but you never can tell about the old guy.

  25. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:56 am

    There are strict modification rules from NASCAR to soap box derby!  

  26. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:57 am


  27. Cube
    April 20th, 2012 @ 6:53 pm

     There’s something to that, but overall I don’t buy it.  A marriage is much more than a financial arrangement and I’m sure most people don’t crunch numbers in spreadsheets before having kids.  (We sure didn’t.  It was more a case of “You wanna? OK.”  If we’d done the math we’d never have had kids.) That said, the math can’t be ignored. 

    Ultimately people do what they want to do and find ways to rationalize it if necessary.  I suspect that is a much more important contribution to the cases you mention, abortion and shacking up, than financial concerns.

  28. littleengine
    April 23rd, 2012 @ 8:21 pm

    Maybe it’s the man who’s auditioning… 

  29. Smorgasbord at Haemet
    April 29th, 2012 @ 5:39 pm

    […] Smitty calls me a whore. […]