(((Dating))) - the weird postmodern custom

Dating is nothing more than a LARP marriage, even when "trad" people do it with "trad contraceptives" and "trad premarital sex". Its an entirely postmodern method of courtship so dont be fooled.

Dating isnt trad, but a jewish trick to destroy society.

Attached: selner_petibone.jpg (620x400, 29K)

Traditional method of pairing was:

1. courtship/engagement - youll meet each other at the presence of the family, so hands dont become too sticky and for PARENTS to judge you and your family (because bride become a part of husbands family). Also, PARENTS of the bride questioned you about your own family in order to test the geneology, your material status etc. Parents of bride test everything, you also test about your brides history, that is why old marriages were so successful.
NO SEX happened here. BUT WE LOOOOVE EACH OTHER. Okay, and what happens if you stop loving her or engagement fails? Girl looses virginity and is on its way to work at the whorehouse or marry down.

2. marriage - you are OFFICIALY a family. Have wild christian sex and create plenty of white babies. Congrats!

So where does dating fit here?
NOWHERE.
Dating isnt even courting, you basically LARP as a marriage. You LOOOOVE each other and then you LARP as marriage with another, then another and then you wonder how everyone has a mileage when getting married and how so many marriages fail.

Dating isnt a christian custom (is there a place in Bible that even mentions that kind of male-female interaction?) but a jewish trick to destroy society.

So Selner and other coolredpolledtrad people should do that kind of shit. Either engage a girl who you think is suitable for marriage, dont do this postmodern marriage LARP.

Attached: marriage_father.jpg (700x467, 111K)

based thread deserves bumpage

This thread again
I thought you died or something.

(sage) how many times have you posted this? of course premarital sex is not a normal part of courtship.
>the bible
lol.

True. If you a fuck a decent girl (virgin) you should marry her.

Attached: RED PILL.jpg (1600x1353, 605K)

GO AWAY TRANNY DISCORD SHILLS

"Cheating" in dating

>SHE CHEATED ON MEEEE HOW DID SHE DO IT I LE DONT TRUST WAMMEN ANYMORE

if you are dating, why are people angry when one cheats?

Put emotions that develop aside and think about this - do people in a mock marriage/play house (=dating) ever do official vows to stay loyal to each other during death? do you take vows do even stay with them UNTIL DEATH as you do in marriage?

Basically, the unwritten rule is, if you if infatuation stops or you find better, youll switch. You literally have no TRAD reason to get mad if you are cheated and not engaged or married.

mind=bl000wn

hi bro

what do you think about above?

Attached: dating1533941795564.png (612x520, 260K)

Sounds about right

>serious relationship

funny how we have all this postmodern terms noone even thinks about. What is a "serious relationship" compared to "unserious one"? What are the vows, what are the rules etc.

>GO AWAY TRANNY DISCORD SHILLS

brilliant.

>of course premarital sex is not a normal part of courtship

sure, but normalization came by dating.

Attached: courtship isnt (((dating))).jpg (408x367, 59K)

Truth. I'd be ok with dating being essentially the same as marriage but without the paperwork, that is a stable, long term relationship with the intention to eventually marry. Like a trial run for marriage. None of the "le sex on third date" bullshit. I went out with my gf for several weeks before we had sex, and at that point we both intended to remain together. If we didn't marry earlier it's because of a sort of "inverse social pressure" where it's seen as strange for people to get married after just a few weeks or months of being together. Nowadays you're expected to be together for 3+ YEARS before getting married.

The Bible teaches just that!

>"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife."

>long term relationship with the intention to eventually marry. Like a trial run for marriage. None of the "le sex on third date" bullshit. I went out with my gf for several weeks before we had sex,

but courtship is actually a better test for marriage compatibility than meme serious relationships, Im glad it turned out good for you, but if it didnt, the girl would be defiled for another men (if she was a virgin, if she wasnt she was defiled for you).

If courtship fails, girl still keeps her high value, so its not surprising that in history most couples married as virgins and those marriages lasted.

Attached: courtship2.jpg (1624x1080, 284K)

>don't try to find women in the only way that won't make you seem like a retard, goy, kids are overrated anyway

>>don't try to find women in the only way that won't make you seem like a retard, goy, kids are overrated anyway

brilliant reading comprehension skills!

Did you do that? Are you married? Did you marry as a virgin? Did you court your wife or did you date her?

Based catholic slav.
Wish there were more.

Based. Are you also the tech hate guy?

What if the girl has a single mom? Should a man take her before she becomes a whore, at like 15 years of age LMAO

I say live and let live

that never happens you homo

>Should a man take her before she becomes a whore, at like 15 years of age LMAO

not legal or possible, courtship today is also unrealistic. regardless, we should know what to aim for and where are the dangers.

>Are you also the tech hate guy?

why do you think so?

Of course. I'm just asking if you have an idea what should be done in that case.

Fuck off discord tranny shill. Dating is a great way to test-run a girl before committing.

Fuck off and die, dirty kike.

This is accurate. I would get into the reality of what a true Christian relationship/marriage is like, but it's so alien to modern people, including modern "christians" that it's essentially impossible for them to understand.

not surprising in the least, 20th century at every point was in a late post-christian era and rapidly falling down the abyss of degeneracy

synagogue of satan calumniating a post rooted in proper reason and morals

When I see some trad, yet even for Jow Forums too controversial topics, I can already assume they're started by a croat flag. Maybe it's all the same guy.

>I would get into the reality of what a true Christian relationship/marriage is like, but it's so alien to modern people

Thank you for understanding my position, the response in this thread for such a simple request for union of soulmates with marriage shows how deep we are fallen regarding godly influence on everyday culture. We are living in a big and ugly lie. God bless!

Attached: family1541008200669.jpg (636x814, 66K)

>tfw no pettiboner gf

Attached: brittanyheli.jpg (1080x895, 80K)

It is assumed in a relationship that the two of you are going to be exclusive, that's the default. Even if that relationship isn't until death cheating is still wrong, because the person should just break up with their current partner or ask for an open relationship, which is just retarded. The lack of permanence in a relationship as opposed to marriage does not make cheating less wrong.

If the person is cheating it's because they want to get the benefits of having additional partners without having to inform their current partner and risking that their partner can go and do the same. If they weren't afraid of this, they would just break up with their partner and say they're moving on, or they would extend the same option to their partner to go and engage sexually with other people (which, like I said, is retarded and totally unsustainable as a relationship). Cheating is wrong because it's selfish and manipulative, and yes, there are entirely TRAD reasons to get mad at selfish and manipulative people.

>Basically, the unwritten rule is, if you if infatuation stops or you find better, youll switch
This kind of sums up what I'm trying to say. If you dump the person you're seeing and then move on, that's fair game, but that isn't cheating. If you're staying with the person you're seeing and seeing other people behind their back then that's still wrong.

>This kind of sums up what I'm trying to say. If you dump the person you're seeing and then move on, that's fair game, but that isn't cheating.

but you wont find them if you arent searching for them wont you? The thing is its a total wink wink nudge nudge unwritten rule that entire time during dating you have "options opened" .

Its an awfully hypocritical method of interaction.

>yet even for Jow Forums too controversial topics, I can already assume they're started by a croat flag

swag!

>not surprising in the least, 20th century at every point was in a late post-christian era and rapidly falling down the abyss of degeneracy

dont forget to say a few prayers for your brother also.

I don't see how, if both persons have options opened there's no hypocrisy there unless someone doesn't have the courtesy to end their current relationship before pursuing another.


>Mike is dating Sarah
>Sarah meets Jack and is more interested
>Sarah dumps Mike and begins dating Jack
Well, that sucks for Mike, but Mike could have always done the same thing, so it's not hypocritical, maybe insensitive, but not hypocritical. And similar to what you were saying earlier, Mike really doesn't have any right to get mad in this situation. Sarah followed proper form, she terminated her current relationship, thus terminated its exclusivity, and initiated another one with someone else.


>Mike is dating Sarah
>Sarah meets Jack and is more interested
>Sarah begins fucking Jack while never telling Mike about it
>Mike later finds out
Sarah is being hypocritical in this case. She wanted the stability of coming back to Mike at the end of the day, and the reason she didn't tell him is because she knew she'd have to accept either
a) That Mike, if allowing her to see Jack, would then have the freedom to go and see other women as well, and Sarah doesn't want to risk Mike getting away from her
or
b) That she would have to end her relationship with Mike which means he's allowed to go and pursue other women and she doesn't want to risk not having a backup plan in case things don't work out with Jack

The hypocrisy here stems from Sarah having two partners but she won't allow Mike to have the same option.

We need to pray as much as we can these days, because it's our only bastion. Where we are is so far beyond what Christendom had ever established, produced, proclaimed, etc. that even "traditionalists" tend to be false-traditionalists who are really just modernists, a sort of conservatism that looks at late 19th and early 20th century as their model, which was really just a point of time that exploded in modernism and intense anti-christian activity. Nowadays even the behavior WITHIN marriage by so-called traditionalists is totally warped and inverted, putrid and sick, like what you refer to with "trad contraceptives." Total abandonment of trust in providence as the train of apostasy has marched forth.

>>Mike is dating Sarah
>>Sarah meets Jack and is more interested
>>Sarah begins fucking Jack while never telling Mike about it
>>Mike later finds out

>Sarah is being hypocritical in this case.

You cant even claim that, I dont see people taking any type of official public vows on not cheating, sure its not admirable, but within the framework of dating you actually cant blame someone from cheating.
Searching for another partner or "being opened to it" while "being in a serious relationship" (notice how much double speak is often used) is also a form of cheating or at least vulgarizing love. You dont meet another partner during a relationship if you arent receptive to it.

>Total abandonment of trust in providence as the train of apostasy has marched forth.

a lot of my understanding of these topics comes from what Gods Spirit is telling. Its pretty sickening when you see how deep the farse goes on an interpersonal level. Pray for me bro, Im praying for you.

Yes I absolutely can claim Sarah is being hypocritical in this case. The fact that she didn't make a public vow doesn't make it less hypocritical, hypocrisy just means she's has different standards for Mike's behavior than her own. And yes, you absolutely can blame someone for cheating in the framework of dating, for the reasons I outlined previously. It's still wrong to cheat because you've set a standard for yourself that your partner does not have as well, you don't need to make a public vow for double standards to be wrong.

I don't know what a "serious relationship" as opposed to just a "relationship" is so I just say relationship.
>Searching for another partner or "being opened to it" while "being in a serious relationship" (notice how much double speak is often used) is also a form of cheating or at least vulgarizing love.
That's an indictment of the person who engages that way rather than relationships themselves. That possibility is there, sure, but engaging in relationship-hopping also demonstrates that you're not reliable. Mike would be wise not to trust Sarah in the future and pursue a woman who has more reliability. Likewise, anyone who knows Sarah hops like that would be wise not to get involved with her.