I’ve always been suspicious of women who make a living through their physical beauty. I see a few problems with modeling as a career. First, you don’t have to produce anything useful that requires understanding the real world, like a programmer or a nurse. Second, you focus a lot on your appearance, and that’s not healthy, since it all fades out by age 35 anyway. Women who get a lot of attention for free typically don’t know how to treat men, either. They don’t learn because they don’t have to learn.

With that in mind, here’s an article by an aging 38-year-old model that illustrates the problem:

Earlier this month I opened the door to a bouquet of flowers.

They were from yet another man who wants to date me. He’s 35, tall, dark and handsome.

[…]And this week, as the gifts roll in from admirers for Valentine’s Day — I have already received two…

[…]I am 38 and have been single for four years.

So, the first thing to point out about this is that it confirms what I was saying about pretty women. Look at the way she talks about how all these men are paying attention to her. Like it or not, her worldview is going to be conditioned by this attention she’s getting from men. She isn’t having to write code to get attention. Or set a fracture. Or do anything. She just gets it because she was born with good looks. And she doesn’t see that it is her job to 1) prepare her character for attracting a man who wants to commit, or 2) choose men who are interested in commitment. Her job is just to be pretty, and then tell everyone how much attention she’s getting from men. Men who will not commit to her. She is mistaking the attention for intent to marry. But men who pay attention to dumb, pretty women don’t intend to marry them. They just want to pump and dump them.

But she doesn’t see her failure to prepare herself for commitment and to prefer commitment-minded men as her problem. On the contrary – her singleness at 38 is the fault of men being worthless:

And I hate to break it to any other single women in their late thirties, but all the decent men in our age bracket have been taken.

[…]While I work out every day, these men look a decade older.

Beer bellies, bad manners, little respect for single women and minimal hygiene — I’ve seen it all on the apps.

Over the past four years I’ve been on almost 500 dates trying to find Mr Right.

And while I have become something of an expert on dating apps — last year I got a congratulations from Tinder for getting 25,000 likes for my profile — unfortunately, I am still looking for The One.

My theory is all the good men were snapped up when they were young. All that’s left is the dregs.

Now, she doesn’t think that she is the dregs for being 38 and being completely unsuited to marriage. She thinks that men are the dregs – because they don’t have an attractive height and appearance. That’s what she’s looking for – and that’s the only thing she’s looking for. She’s had relationships with men, but they just LIVED WITH HER. They never committed, because she wasn’t looking for a man who would commit, she was looking for a man with appearance, height, fitness and hygiene. Someone who looked as good as her.

Doubt me? Read her own words – this is what she values in a man:

During my 500 dates, the only guy I have seriously dated was my age and had the best hair and teeth in the world.

He even had a “proper” job and took me out for fancy dinners. Alas, he wasn’t ready to settle down — or something like that.

Apart from that, there was the guy who looked like Superman on his dating profile but turned up with a long white Santa beard. His body had gone to pot and he was wearing unwashed clothes.

Then there was the wealthy consultant who took me to his club where cocktails were thirty quid a pop. He was generous but knew the value of nothing. Plus, he continually scoffed salt and vinegar nuts on our date — the odour was revolting.

[…]Then there are the beer bellies. If a man has one, I know we’ll have nothing in common as I’m active…

And so on. Everything is about appearance. She’s looking for exactly what she is herself: a pretty face. That’s what she knows, understands and values. And she has no idea that the willingness to commit is not related to external appearances. The important thing for her is the man’s appearance. And that’s why she has 5 billion dates and no commitment. Only a certain kind of man commits. It’s going to be related to his personal character – religion, morality, etc. – more than it’s related to what she can see with her eyes.

In order for a man to stick with a woman through childbirth and aging, he’s going to have to have some reason to value her beyond youth and beauty. And not every man has such reasons. That’s why it’s the woman’s job to do two things. 1) to develop the kinds of character traits that are likely to attract a commitment-minded man, like fitness, femininity, vulnerability, trust, kindness, etc. and 2) to evaluate men and separate the ones who have a worldview that values women for more than youth and beauty.

In the case of Christian men, we are looking for women who have self-control, sobriety, chastity, fidelity, etc. And we are especially attracted to women who take God’s goals as their own, and work independently to promote the things that God thinks are valuable. Women who can defend God’s existence and reputation are highly regarded. Women who put others above their own selfish desires, especially children and animals. Women who are content at home with a non-fiction book. Women who don’t seem to waste money on entertainment, fun and thrills. The woman has to have what commitment-ready men want, and she has to know which men are ready for commitment. SHE CAN’T READ THAT WITH HER EYES OR WITH HER FEELINGS. She’s going to have to ask questions and investigate what he demonstrates about his character with his actions and accomplishments.

I found an amazing article about the Afghanistan situation over on An Affair with Reason. Laura has a background in defending Christianity to Muslims. She’s traveled all over the Middle East. So, she has a lot of experience in that area, having conversations with those people. I know she’s been to Afghanistan, so she knows what’s going on there. And she’s not happy.

Here’s the post.

She talks about how the Taliban have retaken Afghanistan, are capturing 12-year-old girls for sex slavery, and they are going door to door searching for Christians and U.S. allies to murder them. ISIS, (which nearly took over Iraq under Obama, then was crushed under Trump), is reforming and gaining strength. You might remember that ISIS is famous for sex-trafficking underage female captives. She mentions how China, which runs concentration camps and is a huge human rights violator, has also been emboldened by our weakness.

Since she wrote the article, more news has emerged. You may have heard that 13 American soldiers have been killed by the Taliban, and billions of dollars of high-tech military equipment has  been captured by the Taliban terrorists. Officers who are critical of these policies are being taken off duty and told not to comment on the Biden administration’s failures. The Biden administration is blocking efforts to evacuate Christians. Almost none of the people being evacuated are Christians. 

So, she asks this question for people who supported Biden:

Did our leaders calculate the cost of American lives being lost and decide that it just wasn’t worth it? Did they make the very difficult decision to turn our backs on our allies, abandon 15,000 American citizens in Afghanistan, allow women to be raped and killed, leave Christians to be beheaded and crucified, and permit the rise of terror cells because preventing all of that just wasn’t worth the massive numbers of American lives that were being lost daily in the war in Afghanistan? No! There had not been a single American casualty in Afghanistan in 18 months!! The cost in U.S. lives was down to zero! The huge price had already been paid and now our volunteer-registration military were maintaining a small presence of about 2500 soldiers to keep from losing all that had been gained by the tremendous sacrifice of Americans over the past two decades, both in lives lost and in trillions of dollars spent since September 11, 2001. There was no war, in the traditional sense. There was a small, strategic presence, and it was working magnificently.

The reality is that this decision was made because it’s what the American people demanded. As of April of this year, 69% of Americans wanted a full withdrawal from Afghanistan. And why did Americans think that was a good idea? Because short, catchy, popular phrases that make us look good to others are in, and thoughtful, well-researched, informed positions that go against the tides of culture are out.

We want to be on the side of “Black Lives Matter”, even though the policies of this organization overtly destroy black families and black lives. We want to be on the side of “Science is real”, even though this slogan is used to cover for a definition of science that excludes the supernatural, rejects objective morality, and, well…denies scientific facts. And we buy into foolishness like, “No more endless wars”, when the reality is that our way of life must be defended against the evil that seeks to destroy us.

We have been so dumb for so long, watching trash on television instead of reading great books, receiving our “education” from a government-run system that has rejected the principles upon which this country was built in order to fulfill a demonic agenda, and surrounding ourselves with people who are just as dumb, that we have lost our ability to think critically and to act morally. The drive to withdraw the troops from Afghanistan was no exception.

As Dan Crenshaw, member of the U.S. House of Representatives and a former Navy SEAL who lost his eye during combat in Afghanistan, has said, the argument for bringing home the troops was purely an emotional one. It was not an informed, fact-based decision in which voters and the leaders who represent them weighed the pros and cons and came to a sensible conclusion. Rather, like so many people’s policy positions today, it was driven by an emotion-driven slogan that sounds nice but doesn’t work in the real world. In this case, that slogan was “No more endless wars!”

Politics begins and ends for Democrat voters with their own feelings. They read almost nothing that would help them understand how the world works. They just try to watch social media and TV to see what slogans they need to spout in order to feel good and be liked. It doesn’t matter to them what happens next if policies are enacted. The important thing is to find out what is being praised on social media and TV, and then spout those slogans to their friends.

Consider policies like raising the minimum wage, or fixing the amount that landlords can charge for rent. Democrats support these policies, because they sound “nice”. And they want to feel generous – with other people’s money. But minimum wage hikes results in higher unemployment for low-skilled workers, and rent control results in housing shortages and slums. But if you only care about yourself, then these bad results don’t matter to you. And how can you predict the bad results? You read non-fiction books on economics – something no Democrat is willing to do. They want to feel good, and have an easy life. Reading books is boring and too much work. If they read anything, it’s devotions, self-help, romance novels and entertaining fiction.

That’s why Democrats look at the condition of blacks in America, and they don’t want to criticize the root causes: fatherlessness and government-run schools. It’s easier for them to blame some other successful ethnic group than to tell people who are making mistakes “you need to make decisions like Asians, if you want Asian life outcomes”. Instead of telling the truth, they lie, so that they look good to others.

We really need to do better than voting feelings and peer approval at election time. It’s about the direction of the country – not about your feelings or your need to virtue signal.