Tuesday, December 31, 2013

An Indian woman in the West

Via Sunshine Mary I found an intriguing story about a single 32-year-old Indian woman living in the U.S.

Her tale goes like this. Her two siblings followed their parents' advice and married fellow Indians at a relatively early age and are now happily raising children. But she decided to follow the lifestyle of her white female friends. She admits to sleeping with 18 white men in her 20s, but now she is unhappy in her early 30s.

Why the discontent? Well, it seems that all those white men were happy to sleep with her but not marry her. So whilst her white female friends were able to marry in their late 20s she wasn't.

Furthermore, she has discovered in her early 30s that her Indian heritage and identity do matter to her. She now wants to marry an Indian man. But these men have options. They have a choice of traditional Indian women in the U.S. or they can go to India and find a young, family-oriented woman to marry.

There are several interesting aspects to her story. First, she actually believes that she's been sexually modest:
I just wanted to make things clear I didn't "sleep around." Most of my relationships have been long term I have only been with 18 guys.

How does she figure that 18 guys aren't so many? Because it is considerably less than what her friends managed:
My number is actually lower than some of my friends who were in the 30s and 40s...

What a strange culture we live in. These women are breaking the connection, and the ties of fidelity, with their future husbands even before they get married. (I'm glad to say that the young women I work with don't seem to follow this pattern; one very sweet and pretty young woman in my office got married this year - she met her husband whilst still a teen, has been with him ever since and is looking forward to having children with him. As is so often the case, she comes from a close knit, loving family herself).

Here's another aspect to this story. The narrative we are told to follow is that white men are the privileged ones, whilst non-whites are the oppressed other. But clearly Indian men living in the West have a big advantage when it comes to family formation. They have three choices: they can follow the modern Western lifestyle; they can marry a traditional Indian woman in the West; or they can go to India and choose amongst the younger and prettier women there to marry. As the Indian woman herself puts it:
I don’t know what to do, it seems like the dating pool dries up rather quickly. No guys really see me as anyone they want a future with. The few progressive Indian guys I met that I really felt like I had a future with ended up leaving me for a younger virgin bride from India. One of my exboyfriends (Indian) told me "You are great and all, but I can get a much better looking girl if I go to India, and one that will also cook for me."

So don't tell me that white men are privileged. Family formation is one of the key goods in life and clearly white men are at a disadvantage compared to Indian men.

One final angle of the story to comment on is a problem that is created by mass immigration. Our Indian woman finds herself in a no man's land when it comes to identity and culture: she can't identify as white but she is no longer part of a traditional Indian culture either:
I don't have any culture because I am not "actually white" and I am not Indian because I am "white washed."

In her case diversity did not lead to multiple cultures but to a sense of having no culture.


  1. It seems to me she is just bitter about miscalculating when to get off the carousel. Perhaps she beliefs if she was white she would have gotten the timing just perfect instead of just a little too late. I'm sure many of her white girl friends end up in the same situation.

    1. Asdf, good point. There are certainly white women who end up in a similar situation, having rejected good men in their 20s, in order to keep pursuing the single girl lifestyle into their 30s.

  2. She of course wants to know what to do next. I don't know the answer. Telling a girl like this to settle isn't even necessarily good advice. What man would she not resent that would have her? Seems like that marriage would be set up to fail.

  3. Why are people so anti-white?? Just go back to Indian--18 men is very promiscuous (slut)


    At what point would anti-whites allow whites such as this the right to protect their ethnic interests, to not be displaced in their country and have their society destroyed-- all just so they can look good for the camera. Moral grandstanding and PC prudery aside, one would not dare argue for the converse--that would be called Genocide.

    Anti-whites expect an entire race to disappear from the face of the earth without even mentioning, not even whispering about it.

    Nobody's flooding Africa with Non-Africans and giving them free health care, affirmative action and special privileges.

    Only White Countries are doing it, only White children are affected, and only White politicians are allowing it.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

  4. 18 is actually a low number, most her age are well over 30. This is why young men don't want to marry.

    1. Well, I wouldn't want to marry a woman that promiscuous either. I accept that there aren't enough marriageable women for every man, but my advice to young men reading this site is to try to find women from good homes early on. I work with a large number of women (35 or more) so I do get to observe something of a cross section of the female population. There are still some impressively attractive and marriageable young women out there, but they are understandably snapped up early on by high quality men (often by masculine, sporty men with good jobs). As I've written before, these women often have very good relationships with their own father and brothers.

      Here's something else for us traditionalists to think about. It is obviously demoralising for young men to have to observe women acting so promiscuously in a liberal culture. If we can build up traditionalist communities we could attract people not just on political grounds but on what we can offer to those seeking to form families.

    2. I think what Anonymous meant by 'don't want to marry' is, (if i may paraphrase liberally), "bachelors who have options have always been reluctant to marry and settle down, a frequent source of common humor actually, and usually end up doing so for the sake of social respectability and sexual access, or in a fit of romantic absence of mind that they come to regret later on (especially before the onset of no-fault divorce.

      But because the 'economics of the marketplace' have flipped the balance and changed so dramatically, with easy sexual access to multiple new partners, no hit - indeed, perhaps a boost - to social respectability from playing the field, and the increased prospect of being the subject of a ruinous divorce without legal resort, bachelors observe the costs and benefits and have increasingly decided to 'drop out' of the matrimony culture and reject marriage as a path to happiness.

    3. Great comment sir. I would suggest to this girl to basically lose any attitude she may have and to humble and prostrate herself before whoever is willing to take her. She should acknowledge herself as shopworn and that the man is receiving damaged goods. This would go a long way towards breaking her old spirit and also ease her suffering from lack of her old ways. If that made any sense.

    4. I don't know. I think the damage is done, and if she committed to settling if would be a source of lifelong resentment and possible divorce. God help the poor bastard she settled for.

      If we assume reform is possible with this girl the first step is a radical change in lifestyle. I would not expect this woman to be able to change from will alone. It will take community, family, faith, and a concerted effort towards changing all sorts of habits she has. In addition it will probably take time, something she has little left of.

      Then again, I didn't say it would be easy. Simply resigning to "settling" without any other changes is a recipe for disaster. She needs an entire change of outlook that removes the notion that she is settling.

  5. From her story, all her friends were "progressive" and their advice was terrible, while the "repressive" conservative guidance she rejected led to good results. She drawn no conclusions about "progressives" and "progressive" values from this, rather she sees herself as a victim and whites implicitly as racist, not taking her seriously.

    She was only "going out with" white guys (18 of them) but no Indian guys. Then she complains "that the guys I dated never really took me seriously. They never really viewed me as someone they would eventually marry. I was always just some exotic fun. This part was definitely a realization that has hurt me to the core." Obviously she wasn't taking the guys she was banging seriously as husband material, but the whites were at fault for not taking her seriously as wife material. How much serious love does she feel entitled to receive but not reciprocate? It seems like a lot.

    Nothing was at fault in her attitude as she sees it; she was just imitating her progressive friends, who, while doing everything else wrong, did at least date inside their own race. As they were entitled to white boyfriends, so was she.

    And she was entitled to a husband at the end of it - one who would prefer her to a wife who had not formed the habit of moving on to the next man, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the next.

    Instead, she has been harmed by "being whitewashed". Not by becoming, through her own determined efforts and against the guidance of her father a "progressive" slut. The problem is about whiteness.

    I can see why it's convenient for progressives (who by definition are "anti-racist" which is code for anti-white) to say: break the rules with us, and blame all the bad consequences on whites we have no loyalty to".

    But why is she so receptive to that obviously bogus message?

    She has no loyalty to whites. They are not her people. And her more conservative family has the same prejudice.

    None of these people should be living in a white country. Importing them is contrary to values of community, trust and harmony.

    And that's before we get to the fact that cecil is right: mass non-white immigration plus forced assimilation in all white countries and only in white countries is genocide.

  6. "Family formation is one of the key goods in life and clearly white men are at a disadvantage compared to Indian men."

    You forget that Indian men, with occasional exceptions, do not get to chose their wives. The selection and vetting process of potential brides is done by the families of the bride and groom with both having to approve a potential match before the introductions of bride and groom are made. Most Indian men don't actively look for a wife as they expect that to be done by their families whom they know will rarely approve a self selected match. (They might have a girlfriend if living in the West but would rarely marry her. The choice of brides is limited by ethnicity, religion, caste and education with marriages between people of the same social rank only acceptable. Highly educated Indian men marry highly educated Indian women and the dual career family is the norm in the higher castes.

    This Indian woman in the article is herself abnormal by Indian standards by pursuing relationships with men without family approval like a prostitute and this will mean that no Indian family will ever approve her as a wife for their sons.

    1. I think the point is that Indian men in the US have the option of pursuing a "western" dating lifestyle and deciding at a later date to engage in an arranged marriage.

    2. Indian men can date women in the West for fun, although the majority do not. However marriage to such a woman would not be acceptable to their families and would lead to the exclusion of the man from his family. Most Indian men know from an early age that they will have an arranged marriage.

    3. She can be accepted by a decent man in marriage and may be requested to lead a spiritual life.Like abstaining from alcohol,meat and sex.Maybe in this way she be planted down by replacing her old habits.Having too many sexual partners may develope the feeling of loathing when it comes to sex will emerge.

  7. Why would one want to marry a woman who has had dozens of partners? She is going to be constantly comparing you to other men and you will never measure up, not matter what you do.

    1. What a fragile ego men have.

    2. Anon, this has more to do with the nature of women than men. The claim is that a woman with a low partner count is more likely to retain the ability to look up to you and respect you, from which a whole lot of other positive emotional outcomes flow. You can dispute this claim if you want to, but I personally believe that it has some merit to it. If it does have merit then it is rational for a man to be wary of women with high partner counts.

  8. All her white friends married in their '20s after having had sex with 30-40 different men? That sounds a bit unlikely. I don't think white men are unwilling to marry attractive Indian women (a friend of mine did) so I wonder if she has some other obvious personality flaws, or just didn't try.

  9. The sexual partner number itself, 18, is objectively high and borders on immoral, but in some hedonistic social circles it's a "lower number" due to its relativity and the expectation that each year one will have sex with at least another person (whether its temporary serial monogamy, ONS or other stuff) and that when one is older, the number will cross the single digits (+10 people). Nevertheless, it doesn't change the fact that this Indian girl is indeed immodest.

    1. In my books, any pre-marriage sex is immoral so 18 is whore territory.

      "Madam, we have established what you are now we are just arguing the price"