Groom ‘n’ Doom

A few years ago I predicted, probably back on R>, that soon, both participants in weddings would be called “brides”. The Party, The Photos, The “Venue”, THE DRESS! had become the most important features of weddings, which were becoming ever more elaborate, large, and expensive. Increasingly the woman, Queen for a Day, old-fashioned Disney Princess, was the sole focus, the Big Fish at these bloated banquets. Literally, like those fish where the female is huge and the male is a teensy li’l minnow who supplies the sperm and then….whatevs, who cares?
I didn’t know then what was gonna happen to the word “groom”. But now, who in his right mind would want to be called a groom? The word sounds like a cross between Grinch and gloom, to begin with; that “oo” sound in English isn’t propitious. But that’s the least of it, now that the verb “to groom” means sump’n like…idk, it’s worse than “seduce”somehow, because it implies that the , ah, groomee, is an innocent tool, a victim, of the groom. (Adding -er to groom is actually superfluous.) If you saw a sign now advertising “dog grooming” f’rinstance, wouldntcha imagine—just for a second, all unwillingly—the pup being habituated to bestial sodomy? No? Exactly what IS significance, the message, of all that perfume, the little pink bows? Fifi is being tarted up like a furry sex toy!
But what I really wanted to do is point you to an article on Powerline blog today, “Can Adults No Longer Consent?
An eminent scientist has lost his job—and we have lost a possible cure for cancer— and is now on unemployment because a woman with whom he had an affair when he was fifty-something and she was—wait for it—TWENTY-NINE! now claims she only participated because he “groomed “ her for his bed.
Actually I think that’s why we used the word originally: the man in the wedding duo is supposed to do just that: “groom” the presumably virginal woman for her rôle as his sexual partner and mate in the biological,sense: mother of his issue. Groom also originally meant the stable hand who made one’s horses presentable.
I argued with my (now former) college friends for a few years about this. It must have been at the height of #metoo that one of them called me late one night agonizing —40+ years later!—over whether she had “really” wanted to have sex with all those Haverford College guys. I naively thought simple reassurance would be enough, like, “Oh yeah, you DID want it. I was there, we were best friends, remember? Don’t give it another thought!” But that wasn’t what she was after, I’m sure I don’t need to tell you. I said CTFO! We were/are. Bryn Mawr women! If WE couldn’t handle ourselves, who can? Then she said, well, maybe you and I can handle it but there are so many poor, uneducated women who might never realize they are doing something they dont “really” want to do,We had an argument wherein I maintained that it was classist and sexist to say that about women, it infantilizes us. ALL of us. Well it wasn’t really an argument: I was a cold-hearted abuse facilitator, and she, of course, was on the side of the angels. “Bless the beasts and the children”…and, evidently, we women are now in that same perpetually incapable category. I am now no longer in communication with her nor any of my other college friends.

Will this ever end? Will we ever get back to realizing that we need a modicum at least of heterosexual aggression to perpetuate our species? I’d like to think the Powerline article will be widely read. Because that is the crux of it:

Can ANY woman, ever, under ANY circumstances and at ANY age, consent to sexual relations?


Hyp, just count your lucky stars you aren’t raising a boy in this environment. I do what I can to protect Isaac’s innocence but this culture does not make it easy.


There is a reason why in George Orwell’s 1984 that membership in the Junior Anti-Sex League was a promising step for youth with ambitions toward selection for the Inner Party.

Orwell writes,

Unlike Winston, [Julia] had grasped the inner meaning of the Party’s sexual puritanism. It was not merely that the sex instinct created a world of its own which was outside the Party’s control and which therefore had to be destroyed if possible. What was more important was that sexual privation induced hysteria, which was desirable because it could be transformed into war-fever and leader-worship.

Noting elsewhere,

All children were to be begotten by artificial insemination (ARTSEM, it was called in Newspeak) and brought up in public institutions.

Romantic connection between humans creates a loyalty which is external to and not controlled by the State. Like all things which are private, it must be suppressed and redirected toward and under the control of the state. This is why destruction of the family is key to all totalitarian agendas. Or, as that great socialist philosopher and humanitarian Benito Mussolini put it,

Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.


Remembering my testosterone-besotted teenage brain and impulses, I can barely imagine the mental contortions today’s teenage boys must have to do. When I was that walking pimply serial sexual fantasist, the briefest glimpse of a girl’s pale thigh/stocking top (before passion-killing panty hose existed), I had to remain sitting at my desk for some time, even though girls then dressed and acted in a generally chaste manner.

Nowadays, girls dress in what then would have been a walking notice of sex for hire. There seems no limit to the provocative (un)dress. God help the boy who today responds to such provocation.


Surely part of Orwell’s point in “1984” was that Julia told Winston she had had willing sexual encounters with multiple Party Members. The hypocrisy of the Anti-Sex League was part of the method of controlling the peons.


I know, Robert. I feel sorry for my young-man friends.

Especially since (although maybe your kids will be spared this) when the late twentysomethings now were in middle school, hell, even grade school, we parents were told: they’re ALL having sex! There’s nothing you can do! Tell them it’s okay, it’s cool, get your boys the condoms and your girls the Gardasil.

So: hands off during their minority, but suddenly at midnight on his 18th birthday every boy is a rapist and every girl an incapacitated victim?
In other words, they CAN consent before they reach the legal age of consent—but NOT after?

Surely some revelation is at hand, as Yeats mused.


Orwell has got a million times better prophetic record than Nostradamus, that’s fer shur. But the Left is an irony free zone: it doesn’t care, it’s not ashamed to follow his once outlandish-seeming blueprint.


[sigh] men used to be so HOT, as Camille Paglia wrote. Okay, okay, I couldn’t expect much secondary sexual gratification at this point anyway. But I miss the male gaze, and even the male commentary, and occasionally the male pats ‘n’ pinches.
Cuomo was right about Italian guys. I’ve never known one who didn’t do those things.( I’ve seen and experienced that two-handed kiss a thousand times). And they still do, in my experience. Bless ‘em.


Anyway: you heard it here first: “groom” to refer to husband -in- waiting is on the way OUT. Let’s see whether I’m more like Nostradamus, or like Orwell.


There are a lot of things one could choose to fret about in this world – but it is difficult to see that one rising to the top of a post-menopausal woman’s list. So what is going on?

One part may be that we humans are highly suggestible. When some topic gets air play in the media, individuals are likely to react. It is a little like those stories about medical students realizing they have the symptoms of every disease they study.

Another part may be Politically Incorrect, in that it invokes differences between males & females. The sad truth is that we all do foolish things, especially when we are young. Maybe females (or at least many females) react to later recognition of their foolishness in a different way from males?

When a man tells a story about something idiotic he did in his younger days, the story often ends with him shaking his head and saying what an ass he was – he internalizes the cause of his stupid behavior. Females tend to externalize the causes of their foolish actions – someone or something was to blame for what she herself chose to do. For example, a 29 year old woman who regrets having had a sexual fling blames the man, not her own poor judgment.

Not to worry! When the overloaded & underinvested electric grid goes down this summer, and sanctions have left us without the gasoline to drive to stores that are anyway empty, and the countdown to the nuclear missile launch is underway … mature women will probably not be worrying about the sexual dalliances of their far-off youth.


Wait, do voting machines still work if the power grid goes down?

1 Like

It won’t matter. The counting by city Demoncrats will proceed normally, assiduously counting ballots from illegal aliens, the dead and DIY-manufactured mail-in ballots from the non-existent at 04:00 hours after “minority party” observers have been forced out. They will have sufficient portable lights to continue their work “in the dark of night”. Just like 2020 (actually, this has been going on in cities for years).


I’m an old guy, I make no excuses for who I am nor what I DID - good, bad, or indifferent. I generally treat with disdain any patently stupid remark by the “woke” or otherwise brain-dead collection of people.

It is my limited and not all-encompassing experience that while boys often do stupid stunts, usually as some form of impressing the girls, women always know what they’re after. One can generalize that as someone who will improve her progeny’s gene pool, provide sustenance to her and her offspring, and perhaps provide protection for her lot if and when it becomes needed. In the modern world that often means a solid or substantial income stream. But look at how many women are attracted by the bad boy syndrome.

That said, it is interesting that we have had 140 years of the “intelligencia” attempting to twist their ginormous intellect to prove something that is inherently both stupid AND proven not to work is actually the best answer for society. Much of the “great unwashed” OTOH, inherently understands what is smart, right, useful, and real. So they will always be “brides” and “grooms”, their weddings will, more and more, be paid for by themselves and so affairs where people count - and dresses do not. Communism has been with us for many, many years, the utopian nightmares that have ALL failed - and failed miserably. Heck, even today’s overtly communist states are failing, even China. So while Hyp, you bring up an interesting point, I don’t think this many years of mankind will be wiped out by a little stupid, incoherent thinking.


Well, just 3 years ago would you have thought we’d be removing statues of Washington and Jefferson?


Depends on how you view “expecting “. After the violence and deaths of 2020, there is little I would NOT expect. But that’s the stupid Left - there’s NO IDIOCY they wouldn’t do. So when the stupids speak out, one needs to continue to treat them as idiots. They have become the enemy. One must treat them as such.

But in a different sense than you pose the question, I will NEVER accept denigration of our nation. There’s too much blood to allow that. They don’t like it here, pack their bags and go somewhere they like it better. I’m fine with who we are.


I predicted exactly that at Ricochet back in 2015 amidst the anti-Dixie pogrom that followed the South Carolina church shooting, referring to the statue-destroyers as latter-day Maoists and Khmers Rouges. And I was called “stupid” for doing so by a member of the cuck-a-doodle-doo caucus at that site.