Black Orchid wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 6:33pm:


Good Lord NO! I never write anything 'just to get a rise'. 

But okay - I'll edit it down a little for you.

A great number of women confuse smartness and personality in a man as proof of good character - only to later discover that a beast has lain dormant within this 'love-interest' whom they have married and had a child by.

Neferti has just been explaining at length how she herself failed to see the signs before committing herself to him.

Throughout Australia there are thousands of the iconic 'Single Mothers' with small children who entered into these relationships riding high upon the delusion that as they were marrying a smart fellow with an entertaining personality they must also have a decent character as part of the package.

Every street in Sydney has its iconic 'Single Mother' with small child - victim of an abusive husband.

The point I made in another thread is still valid - I can understand a husband and father becoming something of a monster in the home in later years as a result of turning to drugs, gambling, or alcohol - or even job-loss ... but if none of these is a factor - then how is it that the swooning fiancée didn't know what she was getting herself in for until only a few months after marriage and having a 'small child' by him?

Answer: Lousy judges of character. No instinct for detecting the bullshit behind the guy's superficial performances. 'Wishful thinking' predominating over critical thinking. His confidence, his good earnings, his social ease, and assurances are enough to delude and bamboozle.

I've said it before: Men can suss-out another man as being a fraud, a manipulator, and a control freak WAY better than any woman can. Almost just by the body-language and look of a fellow we men can make a fairly accurate assessment of what type of person he is.

But not so with women.

And Neferti is just one of thousands who has demonstrated this blindness.

mothra wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 12:06am:


To coin a phrase - Utter bullshit.

Promotions made upon the imperative of gender quotas and not ability is a recipe for mediocrities being elected into positions of power - with the result that society as a whole soon finds itself the victim of The Peter Principle.

The Peter principle is a concept in management theory formulated by Laurence J. Peter in which the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate's performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and "managers rise to the level of their incompetence."

In this case it's women being pushed through The Glass Ceiling despite not being qualified for these high offices.

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 7:00am:


The Peter principal is not gender specific...

Phemanderac wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 7:08am:


D'ur.

Phemanderac wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 7:07am:


I don't do 'encores', Phem.

Lisa Jones wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 7:14am:


Post Traumatic Stress Disorder can be a bitch on the family when the soldier returns from a combat zone.

Lord Herbert wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 7:17am:


I know all about PTSD.....unfortunately.

I myself lived in a combat zone once.

It was in a country called HOME. I was fighting to survive daily. My lethal enemy was my very own husband.

Anyway....that's all ancient history. If only my episodic flashbacks and nightmares could understand that.

I'm very lucky to have a sensitive and caring husband these days who understands what I've gone through...and has been able to support me emotionally.

Not all men are bastards. Some are angels who have come out of nowhere into your life to rescue you.

mothra wrote on Dec 26^th, 2015 at 11:10pm:


That's not what I said.