The disclaimer at the end of the film refers to firms: The events, characters and firms depicted in the photoplay are ficticious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, or to actual firms, is purely coincidental, I felt such ideas are needed in the telling of this story.
How can I describe Terina in the best light? She is Christian, she believes in marriage, she is an immigrant that came to America illegally and worked very hard for citizenship through many legal practices. She is against porn, drugs, and adultery, and homosexuality, and pedophilia. She likes men like Samson and believes we should teach all our sons his message, of singular loyalty and love, in hopes of teaching them, what it means to be “men of valor.”
A lot of what she believes is quite like that of Jair Bolsonaro. She does not believe in rape mind you and would probably be the first to assist in his demise from power. If it is proven that he is bad news for Brazil; news that includes human rights violation. Reasons she would have tender heart towards considering her need to leave Portugal, eleven years ago, and her inability to return.
She is not Brazilian mind you, so don’t ask her about Rio’s Radicals. She is fluent in the language, but she is from Portugal. A mother of three or four children. I can only recall stories of three. A daughter going to college, a son she fought very hard to acquire during transition from Portugal to America, and a daughter that is handicapped, who is 23 years old. I can’t remember if the daughter was adopted or not but each child of hers has taken the handicapped one as their own responsibility. Which I thought was nice.
As I said before she is not American born but came to the country illegally. Some would say as a “mail order,” bride. It was only after hearing her story did I remember how often this occurs in America. She was married twice, once in her own country and after leaving and dealing with the theft of her son and his retrieval, from his enraged and bitter father, she married the man who aided her in getting back what she lost. The man was able to supply a modest homestead for her. Those where important conditions to her before she would marry.
The man would use this “security,” as a noose of course and would riddle her with guilt the moment she would raise a fuss about the economic insecurities.
Most marriages are encumbered by this and most decrees of love are ensured by it.
Callous I know but let’s be mature in our analysis of the facts and not ask questions we already know the answer to.
“Why would a woman of fifty-one years of age flirt with a man twenty years younger, when she is married, has children and can afford to travel from Portugal to North Carolina to Massachusetts and send her children to college and care for a handicapped child?”
We do not risk all we have created for the fleeting good looks provided by our youth, do we?
Are we comfortable risking our livelihoods on relationships outside of marriage and the one we seek to fulfill our fancies with is less inclined to fulfill is financially, as we ourselves?
Are we fools for the thought?
She made is quite clear she has not slept with her husband for a year, she’s been “traveling,” on intercessory prayer trips in that time. In short, she is hunting for a new life.
While I had the honor of entertaining her for a weekend I was able to enjoy a lot of what she had to offer. I was surprised she was so willing to offer so much at the first meeting with me. She was so adorable when she asked,” Did you feel the connection between us when we prayed?”
We prayed for our meal, I suppose this is an occurrence that happens less and less in her own home as her husband battles with their economic insecurities.
She told us stories of her travels and what brought her to America and I really curious as to how she survived the 2008 financial crisis. Wondering what lessons of economics, I could glean from this traveling praying saint. Most are not honest with themselves or others when it comes to economics, love, or their definition of success. That latter one is what really bothers me. I can not rely on a single person to give me their definition of what is to make us content and happy. Because by the time you are fifty-one, there are fantasies that roll around in your mind of re-financing your home, going into debt, with no job security to replace the money you borrowed. All because your wife wants to spice up her life.
I was curious as to what would make her want to go through the struggle she had to endure. What made her want to come to America?
I had assumed she wanted to keep her children away from drugs.
Portugal was one of the first countries to adopt “Decriminalization,” of Drugs and invoked new policies on the country during 2008 that left some areas in a lurch. Towns demolished. Etc.
All three articles fail to address the “Why,” as to no one else will really adopt the notion:
According to Smartdrugpolicy.org consumption of all drugs has risen modestly—most notably for cocaine and heroin. Such policies therefore seem to be effective in reducing certain harms to society, namely those associated with addiction, but are less effective in curtailing consumption.
From what I know about her, she was looking for better. Still is really.
Women seek to cheat on their husbands for no other reason besides desiring to rid themselves of the stagnation that plagues their minds. I have a friend in France (J.S.), a creator like myself. When I have asked about her observations in her own country about the matters of the heart and man. Man being the “generalized,” term for humankind, she is filled with an empathetic energy that I like to seek guidance from. Believing our hearts dictate our reason, not the other way around. She is partial to the French appetite regarding love. According to J.S; after the French Revolution her country really sought to separate the church from matters of state and the flaws of America lay in its inability to divide political principals from religious. She believes due to her age she wants loyalty all the time in a relationship and can’t have competition, but religion does not guide these thoughts, it has been replaced with entitlement.
Then there is her friend who is a Rhodes Scholar who believes the “puritanical ethic,” is the cause of a lot of strife. She believes sex outside of marriage is fine if her husband does not find out and that men fail at this because they want to be caught. (This has yet to be proven. In truth a man would go along with anything if the woman outside of the marriage was willing to hold firm to the conditions set in the beginning and not willing to impede his marriage, which I have found to be a major issue.)
The second woman is always in need of the encouragement of “love,” secured by the first wife. The moment she loses this security, which is prone to occur in these cases if she already has a weak esteem. It has been suggested, only women of weak esteem seek other mates, or the validation found in the ability to have more than one man. It is not always the man’s age of prowess in question, for surely the strength of the woman is built upon its own merit and has a certain radiance when coupled with a man’s. What you might call chemistry.
Loyalty, whether we are religious, Rhodes Scholars, promiscuous, male, female, French or American, each of us desire the honesty that comes with trust, truth, virtue, compassion, love.
These wonderful words that are ensured in the private moments of the night and released in one climatic moment of ecstasy.
Wars, new and old have been fought over the bed chamber before. I am of course thinking of David and Beth Sheba. It is this recognition of how far we would go for those moments of love making that burn our fingers as we dial the phone for that sweet taboo kept hidden. Each woman has an inner knowing of how precious those moments are, they share with a man and that is why each would go to such lengths to ensure who ever they chose to take as a bed partner is loyal to their whim. Why would they then believe a man incapable of similar desires? The moment he tells a woman, “you can’t tell anyone about our rendezvous,” his life is in her hands and he is forever to trust she does not have a moment of “puritanical awaking,” this sense of compassion or loyalty to the man’s wife, to tell the truth and cause a “Gulf War,” in his home; his castle, his security.
After the devastation has been caused, does the woman, charged with keeping quiet, console the man? No, she loses all sense of respect, trust of devotion and finds his tears and heart break over the lose of his past secure life before her to have been wasted and makes for a very weak man indeed; and no matter what they may say to encourage their hearts, no woman, French, American, Portuguese, can abide a vulnerable man.
The most entertaining part of the “high-horsed,” Trina, she saw nothing wrong with ridiculing her husband for looking at porn and releasing built up tension that occurs when she for a year refused to sleep in the same bed with him. She saw herself as saving him from the devil by refusing to allow him to listen to rock and roll or to curse. With her sword of righteousness, she found every flaw and would cut him down to size, tempting his wrath and when he did explode, she would rebuke the Devil and his control over her husband. “Why would she remain married to a man that was tempted of the Devil?” Well the bible clearly speaks against divorce and demands women to accept the callous behavior of their husbands who refuse to stomach the ridicule of a woman who no longer find them attractive.
As a boy I was always upset with the notion of married women becoming upset with their husbands “wandering eye,” or private porn activities, as a grown man, I’ve become angered at the idea that someone is sent to prison for watching porn and not participating but for the purchase and retrieval of what has clearly been the way of the world since the 1500’s.
The woman, never for a minute, would be caught with another man or defiling her eyes with the eroticisms produced by others. If she was honest with herself, she would admit that she has ventured from time to time or desired to and allowed her husband the freedom to choose her over another aside from the choice made under threat of losing a member. Would it not be better to allow the drift? One or the other will have to raise the question, “Am I not enough for you, and if so won’t you release me?”
Of course, such civility is impossible among those who feel each, due to the bond of marriage, posses, the other. (Does the man, not posses the woman, in marriage?) No, not in an ideal marriage, as I said before in the case of Trina, each came to an agreement of terms and conditions and when one of the other fails, they seek to separate, in hopes the other will miss them enough to appreciate what each has to offer. It is odd, it is from an archaic system of marriage, developed from a time when socially woman has few rights, but in the home ruled with an iron will. I do believe they call such women, “Fishwives.”
For me, there is an aspect in the modern woman that I hope all women can acquire, “Not to presume marriage is a “ball and chain,” and you have to do everything the husband says and your wrong for voicing an opinion.” Nope, in fact marriage is a partnership and this woman should work as much as the man. Not a single Christian will deny this fact, if they have any common sense. What is wrong is the belief marriage is economically balanced.
It is not, and won’t ever be and to delude ourselves, sets women off to sleeping around and having the Gaul to say, “Prenup,” or “I want my half,” or “What’s yours is mine and what is mine is mine.”
Infringement will be met with force and how could a woman disagree, did she not marry for protection and security? Who better to save the woman from herself than her Knight and Shining Armor?