Red Pill Women

When Lingerie Backfires

Over the years I have seen advice given by red pill women and some men that the trick to seduce and keep you man is to wear sexy lingerie. They write about it as if its a fail proof way to win over your man. If you disagree with this or say your husband doesn’t care for lingerie, you are quickly shamed and made out to be a prude who has no interest in turning on her man. What man wouldn’t like lingerie??!!! It is just nuts to these lingerie fanatics that they can’t even fathom men like that could exist or at least not take to it favorably.

With that in mind, this headline jumped out at me:

Diana’s sexy secret weapon: The night the Princess tried to lure Charles away from Camilla with racy underwear – and how the plan spectacularly backfired

Backfired?! How could that be? The Red Pillers swear by lingerie.

Here are the details:

She wanted to eclipse Camilla not only with her dress but also what she wore underneath it. She knew exactly what she had in mind as, earlier in the day, she had slipped into Harrods’ lingerie department.

Now she stood in front of her own full-length dressing room mirror, gazing at her reflection. The exotic lingerie she had bought that afternoon was more daring than her usual ensemble – briefer, naughtier, more provocative. This was her desperate, possibly naive, gamble to rekindle the all-but-extinct sexual passion in her marriage.

She was realistic about the competition. Camilla may have been 14 years older than she was, but Diana knew the seasoned Mrs Parker Bowles had a comfortably bosomed allure that Charles, apparently, found irresistible.

At that moment, as she would tearfully relate the following day to a confidante, the prince looked in, surveyed his lingerie-clad wife up and down and declared witheringly, ‘You look ridiculous.’

The close friend, an intimate of Diana who has never spoken out before, recalls her despair at being dismissed so coldly. ‘Those three words shattered her,’ says the confidante. ‘They changed the whole momentum of the evening.’

So, there you have it –a notable example of how lingerie is not the magical savior of relationships.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “When Lingerie Backfires

  1. Oh, wow.

    And Diana was being outgunned in the blossom of her youth by a woman 14 years older than her. According to the Red Pill, that’s not supposed to happen.

    Like

  2. Yes, didn’t Camilla hit the wall. Its certainly a mystery as to what he found so attractive in Camilla. I mean really Camilla and Charles are a better fit look wise. I just see cruel statements like that and the other ways he treated her and its heartbreaking. Is it any wonder she had an eating disorder and other problems. A good example of what happens when people marry and they aren’t really sexually attracted to each other.
    Of course I would love to hear what the godlies say about her…
    She probably wasn’t submissive enough or doing something “enough” and that is why Charles was with Camilla…..
    Can’t blame her for not being sexy enough though….

    Like

  3. Yep. I can so relate. I bought some slinky black nothings one time and my cheeks were burning the entire time I was at the store — terrified I’d see someone I knew; I was conservative enough that I knew I didn’t want others to see me with it. Came home and put them on, and he barely looked up from what he was reading. When he did, he looked me up and down, laughed, and went right back to his reading.

    I give you that I had had four children in five years by then. It had taken its toll on me, but not that bad.

    A few days later I took scissors and cut that stuff up into little shreds. I felt so humiliated and so disgusted with myself with thinking that he’d like the lingerie. Dropped them in the trash can and haven’t bought any since. I do like silky lacy long nightgowns, but I wear them because I like them. He couldn’t care less; I switched around a bit and wore cotton shirtlike gowns, then cotton pajamas, then finally for a while didn’t bother anymore and just wore t-shirts and shorts to bed, and it makes no difference; no response. So I finally resumed my long silky lacy nightgowns because I feel pretty in them, and as far as I’m concerned that’s worth it.

    It’s funny now, looking back on it. It’s funny because I still bought into that stupid line that all I had to was be submissive, be joyful, be sweet, be available and be vulnerable, and the marriage would magically become wonderful. Nope. Takes two to tango, and if one partner has zero interest in the dance, you aren’t going to be dancing. You’ll only find yourself hopping around looking ridiculous.

    Like

  4. Anonymous said:

    “It’s funny now, looking back on it. It’s funny because I still bought into that stupid line that all I had to was be submissive, be joyful, be sweet, be available and be vulnerable, and the marriage would magically become wonderful.”

    None of that works if the other person isn’t actually paying any attention. If they are completely absorbed by their stuff (which is more and more possible today, both professionally and recreationally), they won’t even notice.

    Related–I’ve noticed that there are a number of submissive wife writers who encourage wives to be very indirect with their husbands in order not to be seen as rude or pushy. Again–I’m afraid that a lot of the indirect phrasing that is recommended will be totally lost on the average husband. At the risk of being Captain Obvious, being very indirect is not how American men typically communicate. It may in fact often be necessary to translate wife-ese (diffuse and indirect with the point being somewhere in pages of talking, if you can find it) into husband-ese (short, direct, and very clear) in order to give communication the best possible shot at happening.

    Like

  5. “It may in fact often be necessary to translate wife-ese (diffuse and indirect with the point being somewhere in pages of talking, if you can find it) into husband-ese (short, direct, and very clear) in order to give communication the best possible shot at happening.”

    Yeah, I was told that, too. Be sweet, be subtle, et cetera ad nauseam. I did that and he ate it up, boy did he. He liked the sweet girl, and had no idea I was totally miserable. But, news flash — as soon as you’re not sweet and subtle and all that, look out! They DON’T like that girl. Direct communication? You get blunt and frank and just say it, and they get to say no. You’re stuck. At least that’s my experience.

    Set down limits — no, I can’t be Superwoman and do it all. You get a lecture about how you have it so easy while he has it so hard (I love this when they have a desk job with those new ergonomic desks which they can adjust so that they are standing for a portion of time….then I found out that he has plenty of “dead” time in between clients and they socialize when they don’t have an appointment. I think that’s great, but don’t come home telling me that your job is harder when you can socialize in between times…..not to mention the fact that the company caters lunch and breakfast through some very high-end restaurants on occasion, and then come home and chide me over peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that the kids ate.)

    By now, it’s just hilarious. I’m finding the humor in it, and by now I actually feel sorry for him that he can’t see beyond his own little world.

    Like

  6. Uh-huh….I found that book (The Total Woman) in the library and checked it out just out of curiosity…..was that woman NUTS or what????!!!!

    She reiterates plenty of stuff you can find elsewhere, but geez is she a nutcase when it comes to you-know-what!!!! I couldn’t believe it. For a while I tried. Still back when I thought it was the right thing to do and everything would be magically perfect if I magically got it all “right”. The idea anybody would go prancing around in those ridiculous get-ups is stupid; you can tell they are completely out of touch with reality…..the natural end of sex is CHILDREN, PEOPLE!!!! SORRY! But you can’t run around acting stupid in front of children.

    Ugh…..

    Like

  7. Anonymous said,

    ” The idea anybody would go prancing around in those ridiculous get-ups is stupid; you can tell they are completely out of touch with reality…..the natural end of sex is CHILDREN, PEOPLE!!!! SORRY! But you can’t run around acting stupid in front of children.”

    Ooooh–I wasn’t even thinking about the children. I was mostly thinking about the logistics of wrapping oneself up like a mummy with Saran Wrap and then waddling to answer the door. (Note to the adventurous: if you’re going to do it, do it with Glad Wrap instead–it sticks to itself better and also comes off the roll better.)

    In practice, newlyweds don’t need these kinds of gimmicks and people with kids do not have the time or privacy, and 50-year-old ladies are going to look more silly than alluring in Saran Wrap or French maid costumes or Little Bo Peep or whatever.

    So, heck if I know who the audience is supposed to be…

    Like

  8. 50-year-old ladies are going to look more silly than alluring in Saran Wrap or French maid costumes or Little Bo Peep or whatever.

    ……………………………

    Well, to be fair they weren’t in their fifties back then, they were our age or most likely younger. I did read that the Miami Dolphins had an undefeated season after their wives took that course, so maybe there is something in it. Or else they just communicated better…..

    But seriously, has anybody ever given thought to the fact that your teenage son lives in that house, and would you be showing up in such a get-up where he might see you? Sometimes I wonder what that woman was thinking. Of course, she had only two children, both of them were girls, and she was also upper class and had plenty of household help — and no homeschooling, either.

    Like another mentor we all know…..ahem.

    Like

  9. Anonymous said,

    “But seriously, has anybody ever given thought to the fact that your teenage son lives in that house, and would you be showing up in such a get-up where he might see you?”

    I suspect that a lot of this advice is predicated on the idea that your teen kids are out somewhere running wild, so you have all the time in the world for dress-up.

    Like

  10. I think a lot of these Godly women weren’t too concerned about their kids’ whereabouts. I think their husbands were so darned narcissistic with being King of their castles that the kids whereabouts and deeds were on the back burner. This homeschooled sheltered kid here discovered that much to my chagrin…..the so-called “perfect” wives and mothers were home cooking elaborate wonderful meals, serving their husbands like crazy, but their children were out losing their virginity in the backseats of cars and the like……that was most enlightening to discover. That was another nail in the coffin of all the books I had been reading about what I should be doing as a wife.

    Like

  11. Anonymous said:

    “.the so-called “perfect” wives and mothers were home cooking elaborate wonderful meals, serving their husbands like crazy, but their children were out losing their virginity in the backseats of cars and the like……that was most enlightening to discover.”

    It just isn’t possible for a finite human being to be everywhere doing everything all the time, and the harder one works at X, the less time there is for Y.

    And of course the more kids there are, the harder it is to keep track of what they are doing all the time, even when that is one’s primary responsibility.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s