Headship Game.

With our recent discussion on the appropriate use of Game for Christian men, I thought it would be helpful to offer some detail on how this can be done.  I’ve titled this Headship Game, and as the title suggests this isn’t for unmarried men looking to attract a wife, but focused on how a married Christian man can use Game with respect to his role as a husband.

Frame

Your frame is essential, and in Headship Game your frame must be a biblical frame*.  To attain this you must first study, pray, and be humbly prepared to bend your beliefs and opinions to Christianity, not the other way around.  As a Christian husband you are called to wash your wife in the water of the word, and you must take this extremely seriously.  Your frame as a Christian husband must be one of unshakable righteousness, neither turning to the right hand nor the left.  Know in advance that what the Bible teaches us is extremely unpopular in our modern age, and if parts of it don’t initially make you uncomfortable, chances are you aren’t studying closely enough.  

Part of this will require a careful study of the commands to husbands and wives in the New Testament.  If you want a place to start, you can start with the Scripture referenced in the table at the bottom of my post Reframing Christian marriage.  That post is the beginning of a series of posts outlining how feminist Christians have reframed biblical marriage into something new and unChristian;  understanding how the original is frequently reframed will make it easier for you to maintain your footing as you are tempted by the culture to turn to the right hand or the left.  Other posts which should help you identify and resist common tactics to reframe away from a biblical frame of marriage are Rebuilding the mound and Don’t be tricked into responding to a reframe with an intellectual argument.

Fitness Tests

Your wife is craving your leadership, especially when she is in rebellion.  Sometimes your leadership will be active, but other times all that she really needs is for you to remain immovable, her rock.  When she storms over you with her emotions, what she is craving is the reassurance that you won’t be overwhelmed by the very thing which is overwhelming her at the moment.  Be kind and loving in how you do this, but be the immovable anchor she can cling to and don’t allow her emotions to sweep you both away.  This is a profound gift you can offer your wife.

At times this will mean your wife will make unreasonable demands or do outrageous things to see how you will respond.  Your response to these must be ruled by your role as a loving Christian husband, but this doesn’t mean you should cave in to unreasonable demands or encourage bad behavior.  Elspeth recounts the good advice her husband offered another man here which gives an excellent example of how to respond to a fitness test.  Other times the best response is to simply say “no”, with the firmness which comes from the confidence a righteous man displays when being obedient to the Lord.  Sometimes your best response to a wife who is being overwhelmed by her emotions is to simply pull her into you in a strong embrace, letting her feel your gentle firmness as she makes a show of trying to push you away**.

If you find your faith in your ability to fulfill the role of headship faltering, recall the words of young David before he faced Goliath:

34 But David said to Saul, “Your servant has been keeping his father’s sheep. When a lion or a bear came and carried off a sheep from the flock, 35 I went after it, struck it and rescued the sheep from its mouth. When it turned on me, I seized it by its hair, struck it and killed it. 36 Your servant has killed both the lion and the bear; this uncircumcised Philistine will be like one of them, because he has defied the armies of the living God. 37 The Lord who rescued me from the paw of the lion and the paw of the bear will rescue me from the hand of this Philistine.”

If David could summon the strength to stand up to the Philistine Goliath, can you not summon the strength to do something far easier?  If you respond with confidence and in accord with your role as head of the household, very often you will find your wife’s mood changes with bewildering speed.  However, your steadfastness must come from your faith in God and obedience to your responsibility as a husband, not from your faith in human psychology.  If your response was righteous and loving is what matters, not whether your wife responds as desired.  Note that this doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be attentive to understanding your wife’s own personality and needs, and tuning your leadership style to make it easier for her to honor her own obligation to submit to you.  It also doesn’t mean you shouldn’t seek and seriously consider your wife’s counsel when making decisions which impact the family.  The Bible tells us that husbands are the head of the wife, but it also tells us to dwell with them in understanding.  You don’t need to (and must not) become a tyrant, but you need to be sensitive to when your headship is being challenged and respond firmly with Christian love when it is.

Leading With Joy

As Cane recently reminded us, a wife is a gift from God.  Never see your responsibility as a husband as a burden, but as something sacred.  Never allow yourself to become frustrated with your wife for needing your strength.  Instead, take joy in the opportunity to be strong for her.  God in His wisdom has seen fit to make women and men different, and yet He also joins us in the mystery of one flesh.  Rejoice in this, and learn to treasure your wife’s differences.  After nearly two decades of marriage I find my wife’s idiosyncrasies profoundly endearing.

Some fitness tests represent true rebellion, and as such are serious business.  But if things are going right these will be rare.  There are also marriages where the husband or the wife are stubbornly unwilling to follow their biblical roles.  But assuming your wife is not in serious rebellion, for the bulk of the time leading your wife with Headship Game should be full of laughter and joy.  Learn to use humor to playfully establish your frame of leadership, and learn to see the humor in everyday interactions.  One of the things my wife says with some regularity (in mock protest) is:

A wife is not an endless source of amusement!

She of course knows this isn’t true, and she knows I love her all the more for it not being true.

Perspective

Understand that even in times when headship and submission were widely accepted, wives struggled with submission and husbands struggled with headship.  You can’t do her part for her, you can only do your part as best as you can and try to make it a bit easier for her to do hers (as she can for you).  You also can’t expect to make this all happen all at once, and once you both are in line with headship and submission you can’t expect not to have to continue working on it or to never experience slippage.  Your role as a husband is a life long role, and you need to remember that you are in this for the long run.  Neither of you are going to be perfect, but God has kindly given us instructions to work through over a lifetime to gain in wisdom, faith, and obedience.

Avoiding Sin

If you followed the first steps and are leading from a biblical frame, sorting out what is appropriate and what is sinful should be much easier.  Still, as a reminder I propose the following simple test when considering if applying a Game concept is sinful or not:

  1. Is it loving, and in accordance with your role as a biblical husband?
  2. Is it otherwise sinful, or does it encourage either of you to sin?

If you can’t answer yes to question number one and no to question number two, you should avoid the action.

*Catholics and Orthodox Christians among others will want to also include the core teachings of their church.

**This requires good judgment on the part of the husband as in some extreme cases she won’t be pretending to push you away.  One good sign to look for is when your wife’s facial expression and posture shifts from white hot anger to one of exhaustion or feeling lost.

Moderator’s note:  Since the definition of Game has been a long term derailer of discussions I’m asking commenters to refrain from engaging in yet another debate on the true definition of Game.  This doesn’t mean you can’t state your own view so that others can understand how you are using the term.  In fact, defining how you use the term if different from others will add clarity to the discussion.  For example if you believe Christians shouldn’t use Game, you should clearly define what you include in the category you are prohibiting.  This also doesn’t mean you can’t ever discuss the proper definition of the term;  if you are interested in this I encourage you to do so, just not here, on this post.  If you wish to discuss the definition of Game on my blog, I invite you to do so on the post Cypher’s Problem where discussing the definition of the term has been occurring since August of 2012.  If you wish to discuss the definition of the terms used in the definition of Game, Cane Caldo has a post for this here.  If you wish to discuss the definition of the terms used in the definition of the terms used in the definition of Game, I’m not aware of a specific post addressing this yet but I have every confidence that someone will create one soon.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Frame, Game, Headship, Marriage, Submission. Bookmark the permalink.

220 Responses to Headship Game.

  1. As far as I know, there’s at least 4 different definitions for game which I took a look at here and expounded on 4:

    1. The first crowd believes that “game” is a specific set of codified techniques that were “pioneered” by the PUAs in order to improve your relative attractiveness to a woman’s in order to use other techniques to get a woman into bed.

    2. The second crowd believes that “game” is a toolbox insomuch that a tool such as a hammer can be used to do constructive things such as building furniture whereas it can also be used as a weapon to bash someone over the head.

    3. The third crowd believes that “game” is fundamentally about “charisma” or “self improvement” because masculinity is about building a man who is not just respect by women but by other men, children, colleagues in the workplace, etc. It is the ability to weild influence.

    4. Finally, there is a fourth depiction of game that Leap has been commenting on which is the one I most agree with having studied the Scripture more in depth. This is the depiction of game that it is inherently worldly in nature, and that mascunlity of the positive variety comes from being a masculine man of God as the Scripture define it.

    http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/01/07/to-game-or-not-to-game/

    I’d say there could be a couple more definitions of game if you separate out knowledge from practice as well, although knowledge can be intimately intwined with practice.

    —————-

    Anyway, that’s all I will say about that.

    1. “wash your wife in the water of the word”

    The word used for “word” in this passage is “rhema” as opposed to logos which typically means either spoken word or revelatory word from the Holy Spirit. See more about that here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhema#Rhema_and_Logos_in_Christianity

    2. Lead with joy is excellent. I would also add peace in that as well as it is another fruit of the Spirit.

    3. In regard to perspective, the one thing I would add is to remember that she is YOUR helpmeet, and you are not HER helpmeet. Sometimes it’s hard to sense the dynamics of the relationship yourself, so it may be a good idea to consult good male friends about how they view your relationship.

    Appearances do matter. We want to be living a life that is congruent with our Christian walks — one that appears to honor God as well as that which does honor God.

  2. jf12 says:

    Re: “Some fitness tests represent true rebellion” All of ‘em. All of them represent rebellion, BECAUSE they are exactly the things a woman should do to deflect the attempts of another man to lead/seduce her. A wife ought to be extremely ashamed of EVERY test she does towards her husband. But that’s an ought, i.e. not real life unfortunately. A real husband has to learn how to deal with a real wife’s relentless testing without murdering her.

  3. sunshinemary says:

    Thank you, Dalrock. This is all perfectly in accordance with Scripture, so I don’t know why it needs to be called Game, but neither do I care all that much what it is called. This is exactly the sort of thing that is desperately lacking and much needed, and I am very grateful to you for taking the time to write this up. Your ability to be understanding of and sympathetic toward women’s struggles is remarkable, which makes your advice on how to manage a wife all the more valuable.

  4. Boxer says:

    This is an excellent article.

    I think the problem many religious brothers have with game is one that’s based on perception. This is partly due to ignorance, but it’s also due to people like Mystery who have effectively transcendentalized it so they can sell more books and time in goofball seminars.

    Game is nothing more than a prescriptive ability to flirt with women, and to be assertive without being a jerk to other men. (I use these tactics on other men all the time, it’s invaluable for building rapport and an excellent leadership skill).

    I’m convinced that a few generations ago, this sort of stuff was taught by example, from father to son. Watch an old film from the 1930s and you’ll see every actor doing this sorta thing effortlessly. The sort of communicative dysfunction that’s prevalent today is an outgrowth of devalued fatherhood and absent male role models. Divorce, public schools and corporate cubicle jobs are to thank for that.

    Boxer

  5. jf12 says:

    Headship game slightly aside, it is contrary to all experience (Bill Gates) and Bible (God with Israel, etc) that women are naturally attracted to men who only dominate other men. Sir Chancealot rightly dismissed a recent post elsewhere by summarizing reality “The biggest “tingle factor” for women is thus: Are other hot women attracted to him?” That’s all that really counts; all else is hot air.

  6. Boxer says:

    A real husband has to learn how to deal with a real wife’s relentless testing without murdering her.

    I think part of the confusion in such scenarios is due to men assuming that women are men with breasts. If a man mouths off, he represents a primal threat to the safety of those around him and to the well-being of the group. He’s someone we instinctively fight or flee from.

    When a woman mouths off, it’s because she wants attention. She’s not a threat to anyone. She’s more like a little yappy dog who nips at your heels, pretending she’s a doberman, so that you’ll bend down and throw her a stick.

    Rather than react with

    “I oughta kill this bitch”,

    try and react with:

    “You are certainly an odd little puppet, with all this commotion. What a strange bird, running your mouth as though you have something important to say. You’re sorta cute, despite that haircut. Settle down a bit and maybe we can hit the hamburger stand later”

    etc.

    Boxer

  7. Pingback: Dalrock tries to steal Game from the Great HEartistes by attempting to slide it into Jesus’s Bungholizlozzlzozozo. The Lying Dalrcok Bares False Witness Against the Great Heartiste, Lies, and Steals, while Accusing Heartiste of being a “Sinner

  8. En-sigma says:

    While not a yes man, nor a fanboy, I do appreciate this angle on game and the Christian man.

    I have noticed a recent trend with what seems like a particular commentor on a few particular sites (seeming more and more like a plant) trying to derail the discussion and set up false trails. You have done well to stay on subject and not respond in kind. Noted and also well appreciated.

  9. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Is there a substantial difference between fitness tests and rebellion?

    I ask, because while I’m slow to recognize fitness tests as they happen, I am getting better at it and can respond appropriately on occassion. However, there are a few issues where she just flat out refuses to submit. I’m talking issues like finances and churchianity, not bank robbery or threesomes, btw.

    The two start off similarly, but with rebellion, I get to the point where the only legal options left to me are to leave her or put up with the rebellion. With fitness testing, it never gets close to that point.

  10. Pingback: Dalrock tries to steal Game from the Great HEartistes by attempting to slide it into Jesus’s Bungholizlozzlzozozo. The Lying Dalrcok Bares False Witness Against the Great Heartiste, Lies, and Steals, while Accusing Heartiste of being a “Sinner

  11. jf12 says:

    Re: no substantial difference. This is the heart of the matter. What curbing the natural tendency to lust after other women is to a husband, curbing the natural tendency to rebel against a husband is to women. ANY testing of a husband by a wife ought to provoke the same reaction in him as his groping another woman ought to provoke in her.

  12. I’m glad you footnoted the part about the firm embrace, because that’s tricky and probably not something an unsure husband should try right off the bat. In my experience, a woman who’s not fully trusting in her man’s dominance will read that as “controlling” behavior, and it will only add to the fear she’s already feeling and increase her resentment. Try it with a woman who’s already left you in her mind, and you’ll get accused of abuse.

    If you’re not confident that you’re her rock, save that move for when you are.

    [D: Good advice.]

  13. jf12 says:

    @Cail Corishev, thanks for your unflinching frame. “I think sometimes there’s a hope that if we fix men women will follow. If men all become masculine and dominant, women will happily submit to them, and over time the laws and mores will change back to where they should be. That sounds nice, because it means we don’t have to confront women about their behavior. But it’s a pipe dream.”

    I’ve called this pipe dream the No True Man fallacy, for shorthand.

  14. jf12 says:

    No True God would ever have a problem with people rebelling, would he?

  15. Zippy says:

    Cautiously Pessimistic:

    Is there a substantial difference between fitness tests and rebellion?

    Not really. Children, women, employees, customers, and dogs will all challenge you until you have demonstrated dominance. If you don’t have the dominance to deal with the challenge you will be overthrown as the leader. The less followers like the content of your leadership the more likely you are to be challenged.

  16. sunshinemary says:

    I think the difference between fitness tests and rebellion is that we are actually wanting you to pass the fitness tests, you know.

    Rebellion really means we want to overthrow you. Fitness tests mean that we would like to be sure that you are in control and can keep us safe.

    I wrote a lot about this awhile back:

    Marital Fitness Testing 101: true confessions of a fitness-testing housewife

  17. @ Cautiously Pessimistic

    I ask, because while I’m slow to recognize fitness tests as they happen, I am getting better at it and can respond appropriately on occassion. However, there are a few issues where she just flat out refuses to submit. I’m talking issues like finances and churchianity, not bank robbery or threesomes, btw.

    Stand firm and don’t validate her concerns. Lay out your reasoning, and follow up:

    “I am doing this because X, Y, Z. You can choose to go against my decision, but I’m not going to enable you with my time, attention, money, etc.”

    If she goes with a predictable “that’s mean” or similar response you should follow it up with some sarcastic humor (or exaggeration/agree and amplify/misinterpretation if you prefer): “yep, I’m the meanest Christian in the world!”

    Then stand firm and don’t budge even a little.

  18. Zippy says:

    Sunshine:
    There is no clear dividing line. Followers actually want a poor leader to fail precisely because he is a poor leader and needs to be replaced. And they may want even a strong leader to fail because of the content of his leadership.

    Now you might draw a distinction between fitness tests and rebellion by suggesting that the content of leadership doesn’t matter with the former, while the latter is precisely about it. It isn’t that he wants the knives hand washed that matters; you don’t really care in the slightest about the content of his leadership on the particular point. A “fitness test” is just a pure challenge of leadership entirely distinct from the content of his command.

    But I’d bet it almost never works out that way: rebellion is almost always both a challenge of leadership and an objection to the particular assertion of authority. I’d bet you really do want to wash the knives in the dishwaser; but you will be happier if he doesn’t give in to you, even though you really do want that, because it affirms that he isn’t a pushover.

  19. Zippy says:

    Also it is important to realize that men fitness test all the time too. When you are the leader, everyone fitness tests you.

  20. jf12 says:

    Re: “Also it is important to realize that men fitness test all the time too. When you are the leader, everyone fitness tests you.” No, they don’t. In not-just-my-experience, a man tries something with me once. Only women continually test.

  21. Zippy says:

    jf12:

    No, they don’t. In not-just-my-experience, a man tries something with me once. Only women continually test.

    I have extensive experience as a company executive and small-company CEO. Men fitness test and otherwise challenge authority all the time.

  22. deti says:

    Excellent post, Dalrock. First rate.

  23. sunshinemary says:

    @Zippy

    I’d bet you really do want to wash the knives in the dishwaser; but you will be happier if he doesn’t give in to you, even though you really do want that, because it affirms that he isn’t a pushover.

    Okay, I see what you mean there. But that seems more like a submission issue than a fitness test. I just don’t feel like washing those darn knives and I don’t feel like doing it the way my husband says. How I see a fitness test is a woman testing the boundary to make sure it’s firm and hoping that it is (example: My husband brings home icecream and I complain about the flavor and try to get him to return it for a different kind). Rebellion is trying to break down the boundary and escape from it and hoping for as little resistance as possible (example; Jenny Erikson sneakily filing for divorce).

    @En-sigma

    I have noticed a recent trend with what seems like a particular commentor on a few particular sites (seeming more and more like a plant) trying to derail the discussion and set up false trails.

    Yes, I’ve noticed too. So have a number of other people.

    @Deep Strength 11:30
    Such good advice there.

  24. Zippy says:

    Sunshine:

    But that seems more like a submission issue than a fitness test

    I think you are using “submission issue” to refer to the content of his command. In the particular case it was (as it almost always is) a both/and situation: you really do want things the way you want them, but you also want strong leadership — which means that you won’t always get things the way you want them.

    In a boots-on-the-ground situation virtually every act of rebellion short of total break (divorce, assassination/coup, resignation, proxy contest, etc) is, as a practical matter, both a fitness test and an objection to content (a submission issue, as you put it).

  25. sunshinemary says:

    rebellion is almost always both a challenge of leadership and an objection to the particular assertion of authority.

    and

    In a boots-on-the-ground situation virtually every act of rebellion short of total break (divorce, assassination/coup, resignation, proxy contest, etc) is, as a practical matter, both a fitness test and an objection to content (a submission issue, as you put it).

    OK, I see what you mean. But is there no difference between wanting the man to pass and not wanting him to pass? I want my fitness tests quashed (I think) but if I were to truly rebel, I think I wouldn’t want to be quashed, I’d want to get away with it.

  26. Zippy says:

    Sunshine:

    But is there no difference between wanting the man to pass and not wanting him to pass?

    I think followers (not just women) almost always want both: they want things the way they want them, but they also want the security of being under strong leadership. Those things no doubt have a relative priority in particular cases: if the content is “we are robbing a bank together” — one of the usual reframing attempts by feminists — then you really do want his leadership to fail on the point, on the content. That’s why feminists use those kinds of examples, despite the fact that they almost never occur in reality, as their reframe.

  27. Rebellion really means we want to overthrow you. Fitness tests mean that we would like to be sure that you are in control and can keep us safe. — SSM

    But “substantially,” they’re the same — from the man’s perspective, her actions and his best reaction are the same regardless of what her goal is.

    Also, I suspect that in many (most?) cases the woman couldn’t tell you which she is hoping for when she starts pushing. She “wins” either way: if he stands tough, she gets to stay with a strong man; if he caves, she gets to leave a wimp. Either way, she can feel glad (and justified) that she tested him and found out what kind of man he is.

  28. Zippy says:

    Cail Corishev:

    She “wins” either way: if he stands tough, she gets to stay with a strong man; if he caves, she gets to leave a wimp.

    Yes, exactly. If you fail, the follower is driving out a bad leader. If you pass, the leader’s strength is reaffirmed and exercised. Either is a win, from the standpoint of the lizard brain.

  29. sunshinemary says:

    Cail

    her actions and his best reaction are the same regardless of what her goal is.

    Yes, I suppose. Rebellion always seemed so much more serious than fitness testing. You know, it’s just a lil ol’ fitness test, just a poke to make sure you’re still steering the boat…a firm but friendly response should do it. But rebellion requires that you bring out the big guns (maybe in game parlance, that would be the time to bring out Dread). That’s how I’ve thought of it anyway. But maybe it’s just a matter of degree and not a real distinction.

  30. Yes, it’s a matter of degree. It doesn’t start with rebellion; it starts with a small test that gets a response that doesn’t calm her enough, then another test, and another, and maybe hundreds of tests before it becomes full-blown rebellion. At the beginning, she wants comfort; at the end she wants an excuse to leave. But for most of the time in the middle, she’s just following her instincts by testing him for weak spots.

  31. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    @Cail- But “substantially,” they’re the same — from the man’s perspective, her actions and his best reaction are the same regardless of what her goal is.

    I guess this is what I’m getting at. I don’t think the man’s best reaction is the same, if he knows she’s not going to submit and he’s unwilling to leave her over that particular rebellion. It gives her the opportunity to normalize the rebellion by repeatedly engaging her on the issue.

    For myself, I’m thinking it’s better (once it’s established she’s not going to back down after several attempts) to impose the consequences that I can, explain to her why they’re being imposed if/when she complains, and severely limit my willingness to engage on the topic.

    Fitness tests, on the other hand, can be successfully dealt with by variations of “Knock it off.”

  32. Boxer says:

    Dear Cautiously Optimistic, Cail Corishev, etc.:

    Lest I sow confusion, I ought to again offer the caveat that I have never been married, don’t plan to ever be married, and I’m pretty sure I’d make a lousy husband. I have effectively dealt with women who pull this crap, however.

    For myself, I’m thinking it’s better (once it’s established she’s not going to back down after several attempts) to impose the consequences that I can, explain to her why they’re being imposed if/when she complains, and severely limit my willingness to engage on the topic.

    There comes a point when the fitness testing exceeds my own level of tolerance, and I have a rapid rejoinder which has worked most of the time. It’s to stop on a dime, and change the nature of the response entirely. I tend to grow immediately cold, look the gal in the eyes, and say something like:

    You are making yourself really unattractive to me right now

    Then I go back to doing whatever it was I was doing before, whistling, acting chipper and cheerful, reminding the woman that my life is great with or without her.

    If she persists, I simply wander off, and don’t talk to her again — as in, ever.

    I realize that in a marriage, that last part is not an option (i.e., I have some leverage that you married bros don’t, in that I actually can walk off) but usually these sorts of boundaries are immediately respected, and we all go back to having fun sexy time with no more hamster outbreaks, at least for a while.

    Best, Boxer

  33. CP, I see what you mean, but in that case you’ve established that serious rebellion is in progress. If a man is wondering whether a particular test is fitness or rebellion, he’s not to that point yet, so his response should be, as you said, “Knock it off.”

    Although to me it sounds like you’re “engaging her on the issue” more in your second paragraph in dealing with rebellion, with the imposing and explaining, than in your handling of a fitness test. I agree that you definitely don’t want to repeat and normalize actions that feed her rebellion, though. If that seems to be happening, the best move is probably complete disengagement — perhaps a fishing trip.

  34. Cail,

    Yes, it’s a matter of degree. It doesn’t start with rebellion; it starts with a small test that gets a response that doesn’t calm her enough, then another test, and another, and maybe hundreds of tests before it becomes full-blown rebellion. At the beginning, she wants comfort; at the end she wants an excuse to leave.

    A wise man once told me that marriage (from a man’s perspective) is nothing short than a list of honey-dos. Honey do this. Honey do that. Honey have you done this yet? When are you going to get this done? Why is this still not done? Didn’t you hear me the first time when I told you to do this? I shouldn’t have to repeat myself. Damn well, get this done I WILL NOT ASK YOU AGAIN!

    …and so it goes…

    If you are a man and you don’t have the stiff upper lip for the never-ending shit testing, don’t marry. That’s it. Just don’t marry. Because she is going to shit test/fitness test you. And in her mind it makes perfect sense. And in your mind, you just grow jealous of your buddies that didn’t marry that give to live a life of their choosing where they don’t have to check with someone (anyone) before they do something, nor do they have any other human being that is overseeing their time.

  35. You are making yourself really unattractive to me right now — Boxer

    Ah, that’s a nice one. Pretty much goes right to the point. And if that doesn’t slow her down, that seems like a pretty good indication that she’s fine with being unattractive to you, which means things are beyond fixing and she’s only hanging around out of inertia.

  36. jf12 says:

    Re: “the woman couldn’t tell you which she is hoping for when she starts pushing.” because it all is rebellion and nothing else.

  37. jf12 says:

    Re: the pretend substantial difference. Women indulge themselves in an ex post facto fallacy whenever they decide that, after having backed down, that they didn’t really mean their rebellion. That indulgence should not be granted by the man.

  38. jf12 says:

    Re: Perspective. Wives have struggled with submission since The Beginning *regardless* of whether husbands struggled with headship or not. Given the evident inarguable NEED to rebel that women constantly display, it is NOT the case that “you can only do your part as best as you can and try to make it a bit easier for her to do hers” is best done by always ensuring the man is as right as possible and communicates that rightness most forthrightly. Perhaps, maybe, possibly, GIVEN the inability of women to be rational, it can sometimes be best to give her a tiny little something wrong you did so that she can complain about that little thing instead of a major rebellion; I don’t know.

  39. new2redpill says:

    What an incredible post! This is so beautifully written that it filled me with longing for the church I “grew up” in and the Christians that used to subscribe to these principles. I do not find men such as this who are still single.

    Unfortunately, I think they have gone extinct.

  40. donalgraeme says:

    This has proven to be an excellent post, starting with the main article and continuing onward to the comments. Bravo.

  41. jf12 says:

    Re: wives being an endless source of amusement. You know how lotsa Game sites have a feature where dudes contribute posts about their successes or failures in pickups, and that pickup Game essentially is some statistics or consensus about what works for success minus what fails? It might be amusing for dudes to comment here both about what personally works for Headship Game and what personally fails.
    What works for me:
    1. Dread game. Nothing else actually works.
    What doesn’t work for me:
    2. Amused mastery, playful leadership, or anything else besides Dread.

  42. JDG says:

    This post is spot on!

  43. I’ve lurked for awhile but this just seems like too much. This post is not “beautiful”…..it makes women look like annoying brats and marriage seem like a bad idea. You stated: “When she storms over you with her emotions, what she is craving is the reassurance that you won’t be overwhelmed by the very thing which is overwhelming her at the moment. Be kind and loving in how you do this, but be the immovable anchor she can cling to and don’t allow her emotions to sweep you both away. This is a profound gift you can offer your wife.” and also: “At times this will mean your wife will make unreasonable demands or do outrageous things to see how you will respond.”

    I’m sorry, but NO. Why would I EVER waste my time with a woman that behaves like this? Am I her husband or her father? Why would I waste my time with a woman who constantly “tests” me out of her own insecurity and emotional selfishness? Explain how ANY woman is worth the frustration of dealing with what amounts to a child for a wife? It sounds like you’re accepting and/or tolerating their immature behavior instead of calling them out on it and demanding they grow up. I’m supposed to be her emotional anchor? I’m supposed to remain strong and steady while she does everything in her power to make me despise her? In doing so she is, In essence, the one leading the marriage via emotional manipulation and you sound as if “managing” this manipulation takes precedence over a marriage that exists to honor God – NOT HER.

    You also stated: “Never see your responsibility as a husband as a burden, but as something sacred. Never allow yourself to become frustrated with your wife for needing your strength.” How do you NOT see being a husband as a burden when your wife is doing everything she can to make sure it is?

    This is one of my frustrations with so many sites like this one. You try to advise how men should deal with modern women yet no one gives any reason why any sane man would want them in the first place. As a Christian man, I am held to certain Godly standards & expectations. Are women who claim to be Christian not held to standards as well? Are they not commanded to be peaceful? To submit? To not be contentious (ie – rebellious)? Or are they simply not to be held accountable for their behavior? The very idea of committing my heart, my strength, and my life before God and Man to a selfish, insecure, emotionally manipulative child with the legal power to detonate the relationship if I don’t manage her “tingles” properly is utterly insane.

    To put it another way, men are assumed to suffer the sinful desire of wanting to bang as many women as possible. Using your logic, it would be my wife’s job then to keep me sexually satisfied so I don’t “test” her by sleeping with the cute single girl @ the office. If my wife fails and I sleep around, then it’s ultimately HER fault for not being my physical “anchor” and I bare little responsibility since it’s just my normal male nature expressing itself. In fact, she should see her role as my sexual “anchor” as beautiful, not burdensome, and not resent me for lacking the moral desire & self control to keep my pants zipped. How then, is what you’re saying any different?

  44. embracing reality says:

    @ TheQuietRebel

    “no one gives any reason why any sane man would want them in the first place.”

    The short, biblical answer *was* sex. It can literally be reduced down to simply sex as the very basis for marriage. Genesis 2:24 “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” See Christ’s own words in Matthew 19 in response to his disciples asking him “is it then better that men should not marry?” Christ essentially said yes, to “those who can hear it let them hear” and then plainly points out that sex is why men marry. The Apostle Paul further elaborates in 1 Corinthians 7 and summarizes all too plainly that marriage does in fact represent a burden, particularly for men. 7:28 “Those who marry in this life WILL HAVE TROUBLE, I spare you” and in my opinion beautifully sums up his message in 7:38 “the Man who marries the virgin does well but he who marries her not DOES EVEN BETTER”. Setting aside for a second the fact that you may never date a virgin ‘Christian” single woman, if singleness is better for a man than marrying a virgin what would Paul’s or Christ’s advice be regarding the prospect of marriage to the average high mileage Christian slut you or I have dated from church or xtian dating site? What would any wise man’s advice be about marriage as a moral sexual outlet for a man considering the reputation of wives as being commonly ‘sexless’? Thats rhetorical of course, I think I’ve made my point.

    The married men on this site are by necessity invested in the idea that marriage/family is worth the effort, the burden…. Because they have to be. They have no choice and I hope it works out for them in all sincerity. The single man however can ask himself are the obligations, responsibilities, inevitable sacrifices, burdens, the risks, the risks! Are they worth the rewards, if any? In this day and age I personally don’t see how they possibly could be.

  45. Anonymous says:

    And this just in…

    “Monogamy Made Us Human ,” by William Tucker, National Review, 3 Feb 2014

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/370159/monogamy-made-us-human-william-tucker

    One woman and one man, for life… because harems and Alpha-chasing is socially-unstable and harmful to offspring (even in monkeys). Leftists, however, have traditionally argued the opposite in spite of that.

  46. MarcusD says:

    http://www.rochester.edu/news/divorce-rate-cut-in-half-for-couples-who-discussed-relationship-movies/

    Personally I think the study is almost useless (3 years is not enough time), and I can see this leading to more “EPL,” etc.

  47. new2redpill says:

    @The Quiet Rebel
    It is a matter of occurrence and degree. If a wife constantly hit her husband with endless waves of fitness tests, the relationship would never mature or become stable – nor would it really be worth his time.. I would then question the commitment of that woman to her own personal walk in Christ. No man should really have to live in a climate such as that. No woman who actually seeks spiritual maturity in Christ should continuously rage in such fashion. Spiritual growth demands that she work to bridle this side of her nature under the leading of the Holy Spirit. Study and prayer should bring advancement in this. The desire of the woman to grow and mature in this manner is something that should have been discovered during the courtship if they worshiped together and practiced placing Christ in the center of their relationship. No one should marry not knowing what causes conflict and how adept they are at resolving it.

    As my marriage “aged” and matured, we began to know and respect each other in a way that made fitness tests almost a non-existent occurrence. In the rare instances when they did happen, the nature of the testing evolved to became brief, and not serious. We enjoyed a relationship that sailed smoothly and provided a stable, loving environment for raising our children, now accomplished adults involved in their own successful unions. The marriage stayed that way for over two decades, until I made the fatal mistake of seriously buying into career ambition, which totally changed the dynamic of the relationship and eventually caused him to walk away.

    Truth be told, I enjoyed yielding to his spiritual strength until I entered the advanced educational environment in the wrong way and turned the dynamic of our union on its ear. Not having that rock in my life now is what I miss most of all because while I can’t speak for all women, I know that I was designed to feel most complete when that headship is operational in my life. I also know that he felt most fulfilled when he was able to exercise that headship in a steady, stable fashion. When that stopped being the case, that is what he left to find. He could easily have stayed single, but he did not.

  48. greyghost says:

    The Quiet Rebel
    You are right on every point. Just don’t forget the points you have made are correct because that is the normal nature of women. The advise you see on mens sites is the advise given to a man living in a mad society. It is just one survival technique for a man stuck in marriage based on bluepill ignorance. The other is has you discribed is that there is no wife and don’t even approach it as though there is (smart move)
    Overall men discussing and developing the knowledge and skills here today and elsewhere will help make wives worth having for our sons and grandsons. And most importantly the knowledge allows a man to “see” a wife when he comes across one. Ask any PUA (beta with game) they prefer sluts and leave the good girls (an actual worthy of wife) alone or marry them if they are at that point in their life or take what they have learned and live out MGTOW.
    The point is with red pill eyes and an understanding of the nature of women there are not many or more correctly very few and rare I may say, women are naturally worthy of being a wife. Based on what I read in your comment I’d say you are there. Just remember the behavior you are seeing is normal and natural feral behavior. It is also unacceptable and uncivilized and will destroy all that tries to make that behavior the foundation of anything. See western civilization and the Christian church.

  49. Elspeth says:

    If a wife constantly hit her husband with endless waves of fitness tests, the relationship would never mature or become stable – nor would it really be worth his time.. I would then question the commitment of that woman to her own personal walk in Christ. No man should really have to live in a climate such as that. No woman who actually seeks spiritual maturity in Christ should continuously rage in such fashion. Spiritual growth demands that she work to bridle this side of her nature under the leading of the Holy Spirit. Study and prayer should bring advancement in this.

    This is all very true.

  50. jf12 says:

    the Quiet Rebel asks “How do you NOT see being a husband as a burden when your wife is doing everything she can to make sure it is?” Good question. I do know the answers to a lot of similarly childish questions “How is the sky blue?”, “How do planes fly?”, etc. I think the shorter answer here is along the lines of a zestful “Bring it on!” And recognize that is indeed a HOW.

  51. jf12 says:

    @new2redpill “If a wife constantly hit her husband with endless waves of fitness tests, the relationship would never mature or become stable – nor would it really be worth his time.” Correct. “The desire of the woman to grow and mature in this manner is something that should have been discovered during the courtship if they worshiped together and practiced placing Christ in the center of their relationship. No one should marry not knowing what causes conflict and how adept they are at resolving it.” Correct. But women change. So it doesn’t matter how good the man is nor how adept nor how knowing nor how loving nor how Spirit filled. Nothing at all matters at all if the woman decides to change.

  52. jf12 says:

    @embracing reality re:”It can literally be reduced down to simply sex as the very basis for marriage.” Yes, but. *Proper* sex as the basis for marriage, as opposed to fornication, rape, etc.

  53. jf12 says:

    @Anonymous re: Tucker’s article. Although the overall premise is true, that monogamy is the basis for civilization, a lot of the article is mistaken. In no sense did “many” Biblical ancients practice nonmonogamy; “It was not so from the beginning.” And chimpanzees are the opposite of egalitarian sexually, “carefully mating with every male member of the group” indeed: there are multiple alpha males who patrol and rape. One commits the apex fallacy if one decides that the males that a female mates with are the only males that count. Moreover, it has been shown before that, contra Tucker, it males who decide that enough is enough and that monogamy will reign: when females gets to choose, the result is polygamy.

  54. new2redpill says:

    @ jf12 : Men ALSO change. I married a man who went to church, studied and prayed. The one that left the marriage no longer had that devotion to faith. Nothing at all matters at all if the man decides to change. Once he walked away from faith, fixing the marriage through that avenue could not work.

  55. jf12 says:

    @new2 ok. So, tell me about the process. You’ve hinted before. He was a godly man and you a godly wife, both operating properly with headship etc, and through some process, presumably involving your rebellion, he changed into a nongodly man. How did it happen? Please walk us through it, with our help, for our help.

  56. new2redpill says:

    @ jf12: But you know what? I would not return 23 of the 26 years we had. When we had it right, it was very right. And I would have taken the ride even if I knew the end when I started. Twenty-three years of happiness is nothing to sneeze at.

  57. jf12 says:

    Re: “Twenty-three years of happiness is nothing to sneeze at.” You are correct, and exampling gratitude most endearingly.

  58. new2redpill says:

    @ jf12: Drift – pure and simple. I wasn’t so much in rebellion as neglect. I slowly shifted to putting my career first. It was selfish, but I did not see it as such. At the same time, the thing that held us together all that time became something we could not share. He worked nights, and we no longer worshiped together. He concentrated on his new job, and me on mine. Over time, without the thing that helped us understand each other and bond to each other, we became strangers.

    When he left, he did not complain about my rebellion. He said that I was a wonderful woman but that we simply drifted apart and that he just didn’t love me anymore.

  59. jf12 says:

    @new2 “drift” to me implies slo-mo, like a low speed 18 wheeler slowly jacknifing. You slowly separated in time, then in worship, then in togetherness?
    I personally don’t think I could fall out of love with a wonderful woman even if I tried.

  60. Legion says:

    “Moderator’s note:”

    Do you think people will understand if you shorten it to NADALT?
    (Not All Definitions Are Like That.)

  61. new2redpill says:

    @ jf12: Drift took 3 years from start to divorce, so I think it does qualify as “slo-mo.”. Unfortunately It did not work that way for me, but for him it did.
    I don’t know about being a wonderful woman. Those were his words, and not spoken to me, so I cannot evaluate that position. But falling out of love? He definitely managed to do that.

  62. jf12 says:

    Unreasonably repeated betrayals of my headship is what it took each time to kill my in-love feelings for my wives. And even then, it took me deciding to respond harshly (but appropriately) in order to drive a stake through the heart of my limerence. Characteristically of females, they responded better after I no longer cared. Sounds like that sentence might have happened to you too?

  63. new2redpill says:

    Nope. Believe it or not, we didn’t fight. We only saw each other one night a week for that 3 years because of the schedule.. Truth be told, sadly we didn’t even have enough in common to fight, because we were living separate lives. One night a week, we went out to dinner and struggled to find something to say to each other. One night a week wasn’t enough to sustain a relationship. When he asked for the divorce, he simply said, “I don’t love you anymore and I want the chance to be in love again.”

    I almost wish it had been more hostile and that we had been fighting and struggling. If it went that way, then I could have been happy to have it end. Instead, it was just a sad, slow death that left us both crying in each others’ arms the day we filed over what we had lost.

  64. jf12 says:

    But you somehow don’t count yourself as better appreciating what you lost AFTER he was no longer in love?

  65. new2redpill says:

    Of course! I was focused on my career. And since we worked opposite schedules, it was easy to ignore him, since he was never there. If I had more insight I would have worked harder to make connection because he was gone so much. Instead, I just kept busy with the kids and other things.
    As I said before – short-sighted and very selfish. But I never dreamed he could fall out of love.

  66. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    @Cail- I see what you mean, but in that case you’ve established that serious rebellion is in progress. If a man is wondering whether a particular test is fitness or rebellion, he’s not to that point yet, so his response should be, as you said, “Knock it off.”

    I will agree with this. If I’m unsure whether it’s rebellion or fitness testing, the best course of action is to respond as if it’s a fitness test. However, once it’s established that it’s rebellion, what?

    I’m thinking that though rebellion and fitness testing look the same initially, they’re two different things, rather than the same thing amped to eleven. As such, once it’s identified as rebellion, I’m thinking it should be handled differently. I’m not sure of a best practice, in that case.

    Although to me it sounds like you’re “engaging her on the issue” more in your second paragraph in dealing with rebellion, with the imposing and explaining, than in your handling of a fitness test. I agree that you definitely don’t want to repeat and normalize actions that feed her rebellion, though. If that seems to be happening, the best move is probably complete disengagement — perhaps a fishing trip.

    Well, I think there’s a difference between explaining and justifying. I don’t justify the consequences, just explain them. As in, “No, we’re not buying a house because you’ve got debt and refuse to give up your credit cards.”

    What follows is usually a long and detailed justification by her, but no further response from me.

    And I’ve taken a fair few fishing trips. Sometimes I even take the fishing rods with me.

  67. Pingback: Dalrock follow’s da GBFM’s & Heartiste’s Manly Headship, Stealing da GBFM’s Wisdom Without Reference: Prepare for the Dalrockian Chruchian Police State, where the One and Only Way to Game and Christianity (Chruchianity), is thr

  68. Fitness tests are always rebellion. From the smallest one to the outright “lets you and him fight”. When a woman chooses to obey God’s call for her to submit to her husband and respect him in all things, she must learn to think before she talks – every.time.she.talks. If a woman is truly interested in learning about herself and being honest with how sinful she is, she will likely be mortified by how rebellious her thoughts are. The thought is not the sin of rebellion, expressing the thought with words and actions is.

    Thought comes to mind -> pause -> is it disrespectful, is it necessary, will it help, should effort go into how it is phrased, does it edify?

    For me, the most common thoughts that I need to hold back and either scrap or reword have to do with being mothering. It’s the mode I’m in all day with the kids and I work hard on getting out of that mode when talking to my husband. For example, he has an early appointment and is up late. The thought “you should get some sleep” comes to mind. I pause, give myself a talking to “you are not his mother, you are not responsible for the amount of sleep he gets, it’s none of your business, how emasculating is it to be told, as a grown man, when he should sleep etc.” So I scrap the thought, give him a kiss, tell him I love him and I go to sleep. The next day, when he is tired, the thought will come, “you should have gotten more sleep last night.” Again, I go into self talk mode – “what is my problem? I need to stop this.” And I overcome the thought with positive action, “Can I get you anything hon? Would you like something to eat?”

  69. jf12 says:

    @Sarah’s Daughter
    From what I’ve read of what you’ve written on your blog, and elsewhere, I think I greatly agree with you and I might greatly enjoy and greatly benefit from more discussions with you, but I’m skittish. One comment you made that I read, about men having to (having to!) deal with unruly women “The realization of his strength and willingness to use it has contributed greatly to my very high attraction to him.” made my knees tremble, and caused me last month (was it really just last month?) to redefine a man’s masculinity (correctly, I now believe) as women’s perception of his capacity for brutality towards women. And I don’t like it, not one bit, but there it is. And it is the same thing as dominance etc.

  70. There’s a whole crap load about the truth that I don’t like as well. I really don’t like that I was that far from obedience to God that it took physical dominance to put me in my place. And the physical dominance he used is a small fraction of what is accessible to him. I’ve seen him, when he was 36 take second at an Army wrestling tournament where he faced off with 19 and 20 year old soldiers. I learned a mighty lesson about men that I had been in denial of – it is by their restraint, honor, and control that we live, not their inability. My apologies if anyone doesn’t like the truth that women are very turned on by that – but they are.

  71. jf12 says:

    @SD it hasn’t yet ceased to amaze me that so many women gauge the quality of relationships by the intensity of fights. And that so many feminizing psychologists agree. Especially since a man gauges the quality of the relationship by the exact opposite. It’s not just a pov isse, it’s that those women are very wrong, irretrievably broken.

  72. new2redpill says:

    “My apologies if anyone doesn’t like the truth that women are very turned on by that – but they are.”
    Ahem – not this one. Never once in 26 years was that necessary nor would it have been appreciated.
    Nothing is universal.

  73. Good for you new2redpill, I have never denied that I was a mess – and good for me that my husband married me and has been committed to seeing it through. I obviously was not irretrievably broken (nor do I believe anyone is – because of the nature of the Lord). You’re right NAWALT. Some women appreciate a man who would never express his displeasure in his wife’s behavior and excruciatingly boring and sexless marriage to the point where he looks elsewhere for a better marriage…oh wait.

  74. JDG says:

    Fitness tests are always rebellion.

    Yep!

  75. John says:

    Dalrock, you quote verses from the Bible that support your teaching to support the post you title “Headship Game”. If it has its basis in the Bible, then why do you call it Headship Game? Why not Biblical Headship, Godly Headship, etc. ?

    You make a moderator’s note that says the definition of Game varies from person to person and place to place, so why even bring Game into this? If your system is supported by the Bible, and it seems it is, why call it Game? Why not just Truth? When you call something Headship Game, it falls under the subset of Game (whatever that may be) rather than the Truth.

  76. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Fitness tests are always rebellion.

    Okay, but is rebellion always a fitness test?

  77. jf12 says:

    @SD, as a beta but extroverted male, I see no particular value in ANY of donalgraeme’s, Deep Strength’s, Free Northerner’s, etc etc etc programmes (which I mock by putting the extra me in there) because the only possible result of their Build A Better (Let’s Agree To Not Call Him Beta) Good Man strategy is me, and believe me I’m a better me than they will ever build. And it doesn’t work, and I know BECAUSE it didn’t work for me or anyone like me, ever. Their entire scheme is faulty because the outcome is assured failure.

  78. Dalrock says:

    @John

    Dalrock, you quote verses from the Bible that support your teaching to support the post you title “Headship Game”. If it has its basis in the Bible, then why do you call it Headship Game? Why not Biblical Headship, Godly Headship, etc. ?

    Headship is from the Bible; Game is not, nor am I making the case that it is. The case I’m making is how Game can be used in headship.

    You make a moderator’s note that says the definition of Game varies from person to person and place to place, so why even bring Game into this? If your system is supported by the Bible, and it seems it is, why call it Game? Why not just Truth? When you call something Headship Game, it falls under the subset of Game (whatever that may be) rather than the Truth.

    Headship Game is the intersection of the two, or more accurately my own picture of that intersection, with headship obviously being the dominant paradigm.

  79. new2redpill says:

    SD, we did not have a sexless marriage – ever. Not even the day we agreed to divorce. When we tried counseling, he told the counselor that was the one area that we didn’t need to discuss because we did “pretty good” in that area. Unfortunately, that was not enough to hold the whole relationship together.

    BTW, I did not say you were a mess, nor would I ever presume to know that. It is not for me to make that kind of judgment on your character when I don’t even know you. I owe you more respect than that.

    I am not putting down what works for you. If you are happy and he is happy, who am I to say you are wrong? I am simply saying it would not work for me.

  80. Anonymous Reader says:

    new2redpill
    Of course! I was focused on my career. And since we worked opposite schedules, it was easy to ignore him, since he was never there. If I had more insight I would have worked harder to make connection because he was gone so much. Instead, I just kept busy with the kids and other things.

    I do not wish to pry, nor to ask you to reveal things that you prefer to keep private. But I have some questions.

    Which of the two of you earned more money? I ask because IMO an income imbalance in the direction of the wife puts a number of strains on a marriage, some of them not at all obvious.

    Who was the primary in caring for the children? I’m guessing it was you, but would like to know for sure, because IMO the “mister mom / househusband” situation also puts strain on a marriage.

    What was the nature of the career environment? That is to say, were you largely enrolled in some sort of college environment for a time, followed by employment, or something else? I ask because there are various issues involving authority that IMO are strains on marriage there as well. Example: on this site, on a thread last year, a commenter mentioned a relative (his sister or sister in law IIRC) who worked in a law office, and who was in an essentially sexless, “roommate” marriage. From observation, it is my opinion that when a married woman associates all day at work with men who have higher prestige than her husband (especially if those men are her bosses), it affects the way she comes to view her husband in a negative way. This is not necessarily any conscious action on her part, either. It is, IMO, hypergamy at work in her unconscious mind.

    It is possible for women to “marry” their job. This has a lot of implications. It is also possible for women to “marry” their children – to put their children first in all things, with the result that even when alone with their husband, all a woman can talk about is children (or, if she’s working for money outside the home, griping about work and talking about children). This is not good, because it centers the family and the marriage on “children” – so when they are grown and leave home, there’s a big hole that may not be possible to fill in. I am not saying this happened in your case, I am making a more general point.

    As I said before – short-sighted and very selfish. But I never dreamed he could fall out of love.

    Human beings tend to take certain things for granted. Men and women tend to take each other for granted, although in different ways. Men I know who have been divorced often tend to be surprised by the event. Women I know who have lost a man have also tended to be surprised, both by the event itself, and by the fact that men have deeper emotions that are not readily visible…that men can be deeply wounded, for example, by what seemed to be a minor affront.

  81. jf12 says:

    Re: falling out of love. One of the scary uncomfortable truths that I’ve come to believe is a reliable guide to explaining women’s behaviors is this: Falling in love is nature’s way of ensuring that *men* stick around. Only men. In women it is vestigial. Women tend to biologically fall out of love after the short honeymoon period, and are ever thereafter turned off by EVERY sign that their man is still in love. Roughly, her subsequent (unsubmissive etc) behaviors are directed towards trying to make him fall out of love, and in evopsych reasoning this is probably for her to clear the way for another male without too much conflict between the males. In almost all women, the ONLY way for him to help reignite her passion is to give her clear demonstrations that he no longer cares for her i.e. would not fight for her.

  82. new2redpill says:

    @ Anon Reader:
    I do not mind answering your questions because I am well aware that had I found this site earlier, I might still be married. He wasn’t blameless, but there was a lot I did to contribute to the “drift.”

    Money – I always earned less until I went back to school. By the time the marriage ended, I made more in actual salary. We were even in income only because he had a pension from military service, and I was on the verge of a promotion that would boost me quite a bit over his income. Ironically, I wasn’t even aware that I had come to make more money until he mentioned it in the divorce talk. He always said he wouldn’t care if his wife made more money. Obviously that wasn’t true, but I was oblivious.

    Children – we were married 26 years, so our children were adults. However, this did come into play because since we were on opposite schedules and only saw each other once a week, gradually I began to call upon my adult children for opinions and decisions. I did not see that this was effectively pushing him even farther out of the family action.

    Employment – I was, and am in an environment where there are no men and my bosses are women, so classic hypergamy was not the issue. However I was thrust quickly into a lead position and that definitely changed the dynamic of the marriage relationship. I began to suggest solutions and approaches during our discussions of marital issues which usually worked. I had never done that before and I did not realize this challenged him in a way that was uncomfortable because he did not think of these things first. It was no big deal to me. Needless to say, it was a big deal to him. As you said, it wounded him and I was oblivious.

    Married to children – not married to kids, but his walking out coincided fairly closely with the last one leaving home. The youngest provided an insulation and concentration for both of us that kept us at least remotely connected. When the youngest left, we looked around and all of a sudden it was “Gee…who are you, and what do we do now?”

    Married to the job – In the beginning work came home and intruded way too often. To top it off, I was also enrolled in a graduate degree program. I shake my head now, but then I did not see the danger. Both those things got better after a couple of years, but that is a long time to do damage.

    I foolishly believed I could put the marriage in the background while I finished the degree and achieved the promotion. Then we could relax, travel, and enjoy life. I was clueless about the effect of my accomplishments on his perception of the relationship. I thought I was just enabling us to have more exciting golden years. Yeah…

    So Reader, to answer your questions, I was clueless then but painfully aware now. Not that he was blameless – because he certainly wasn’t – but much of it was on my side.

  83. I am simply saying it would not work for me.

    Right, and what you’ll soon learn is about the concept of snowflaking and solipsism.
    Start here:
    Most men understand on some level that they cannot hold a woman accountable to her words in the same manner they do men, even if they are reluctant to articulate this or admit it to themselves. Women habitually say no when they mean yes, pretend they don’t want what they desperately desire, and tell people things they don’t actually mean. And women can’t afford to have men take their words seriously, for if they did, only gammas and low deltas would ever stay with any woman more than a few hormonal cycles. In fact, one of the coldest things any man can do is take a woman literally at her word and quote her words back at her when she reverses course, as she will inevitably do over time.

    What you may have missed in what I said is the essential key: Women have denied the reality that they live because of men’s restraint, honor, and control. Physical strength and the ability to dominate is not equal. When a woman denies this reality, she doesn’t respect what she naturally ought to. When a man denies this reality, he denies his own masculinity and castrates himself. The frame of dominance should not have to be learned, it already exists. Headship should not have to be taught, it is written – the husband is the head. A woman’s respect of her husband should be built in with the simple knowledge of his ability to physically dominate her should she attempt to usurp his headship, the fact that he doesn’t shows one of two things, his level of emasculation or his level of restraint.

    My rebellion breached his level of restraint, though rightly so and in accordance with his being the head, he did what was loving and put my understanding of the God ordained hierarchy of our relationship back into line. That you have never rebelled as to require this type of correction might be true, though not indicative of your lack of rebellion, that you presume to know that should you be so rebellious that you wouldn’t respond positively to correction is ridiculous. You couldn’t possibly know. As well, you’re a fool to deny the observable attraction women have to physical strength. What I learned quickly is the restraint my husband had been using toward me. I also learned that the respect that not only has God called me to give him unconditionally, he, by design, deserves.

  84. jf12,

    @SD, as a beta but extroverted male, I see no particular value in ANY of donalgraeme’s, Deep Strength’s, Free Northerner’s, etc etc etc programmes (which I mock by putting the extra me in there) because the only possible result of their Build A Better (Let’s Agree To Not Call Him Beta) Good Man strategy is me, and believe me I’m a better me than they will ever build. And it doesn’t work, and I know BECAUSE it didn’t work for me or anyone like me, ever. Their entire scheme is faulty because the outcome is assured failure.

    If you believe you know everything already then more power to you. God bless in your journey.

    I will say this though: the only difference between “alpha” and “beta” is the mindset. If you change the mindset, you change the person. This parallels the Christian walk very closely. Don’t get stuck in the prison of your own mind.

  85. Anonymous Reader says:

    One quick remark, more later:

    new2redpill
    Married to the job – In the beginning work came home and intruded way too often.

    Back before email, many men worked to disassociate their home life from work. Only true emergency phone calls from work while at home, and vice versa. There was, and is, a lot of wisdom in that position. Alas, it is not so easy now.

    It is increasingly expected of men and women in some jobs that they be available all the time. That every text or email or tweet be responded to. The result is, married people can have an unwanted third party sitting between them on the couch, in a virtual sense. In a situation where both the man and woman have jobs like this, some kind of deadline has to be put in place. If nothing else, “turn that thing off at 9:00 PM” is a good first step. This is my wordy way of saying “it’s even easier to bring the job home than it used to be”.

    That leads to another fact: many people find it difficult to fully disengage from some situations. Let’s say that both man and woman are working at jobs, and there are difficult people each one has to deal with. A weekend getaway won’t be of much benefit if one, or the other, or worse yet both parties are mentally arguing with co-workers. In essence, that brings the offending party along on the trip, in a virtual sense.

    The art of conversation is very much worth cultivating. Married people need to be able to talk about something other than work, health, problems and children (if any).

    Thanks for your frank response.

  86. Novaseeker says:

    Married to the job – In the beginning work came home and intruded way too often. To top it off, I was also enrolled in a graduate degree program. I shake my head now, but then I did not see the danger. Both those things got better after a couple of years, but that is a long time to do damage.
    I foolishly believed I could put the marriage in the background while I finished the degree and achieved the promotion. Then we could relax, travel, and enjoy life. I was clueless about the effect of my accomplishments on his perception of the relationship. I thought I was just enabling us to have more exciting golden years. Yeah…
    So Reader, to answer your questions, I was clueless then but painfully aware now. Not that he was blameless – because he certainly wasn’t – but much of it was on my side.

    Well, to be fair, he *allowed* these things to happen. If he were acting properly, he would not have done that, so he takes a large part of the “blame” for things developing as they did, number one, and then for just walking out when he didn’t like the mess that he had helped to make.

    I made similar mistakes in my own marriage, but it happened at the very beginning so we were very screwed up almost from day one. W was away at grad school the entire week and, while home on weekends, busy with studying on weekends – this lasted for the first three years of the marriage and then we had our first kid as soon as she graduated, and she promptly began her career a few months later. It was a disaster in pretty much all aspects because, among other things, our relationship never really developed well as a couple from the beginning due to the extensive separation, and then the additional aspects of a baby and a career happening at the same time and it just didn’t take very long for things to more or less completely go upside down on us. This was all a huge, colossal mistake on my part, and something that I bear responsibility for as well as her. We stayed together for four more years, and I understand now all of the mistakes that I made during those four years as well having learned more about female psychology in the last ten years. But at the time I was entirely clueless and pretty much made every single mistake in the book capable of being made when it comes to women (and we were both church-attending (and active in church activities) virgins at marriage, too – didn’t help when we each made so many other mistakes).

    Bottom line: you made mistakes, but he made a lot as well, as far as I can tell from your story.

  87. jf12 says:

    @Deep Strength “If you change the mindset, you change the person.” Yes. Basically, the difference between alpha and beta is that the alpha has a badder mindset. He knows he can be badder with women than the beta knows. An alpha is No True Good Man, unfortunately in reality.

  88. “@Deep Strength “If you change the mindset, you change the person.” Yes. Basically, the difference between alpha and beta is that the alpha has a badder mindset. He knows he can be badder with women than the beta knows. An alpha is No True Good Man, unfortunately in reality.”

    Nope, that’s incorrect.

    I explained this here (and I’m leaving the link here for others since I know you won’t read it):

    http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/christian-masculinity-mindset-and-fitness-testing/

  89. jf12 says:

    @nope. Reality doesn’t work they way you say it does. I too wish it did, but it doesn’t.

  90. Dalrock says:

    @Mark

    Awesome Post!….

    Thanks!

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/dalrock-tries-to-steal-game-from-the-great-heartistes-by-attempting-to-slide-it-into-jesuss-bungholizlozzlzozozo-the-lying-dalrcok-bares-false-witness-

    This is the price of fame!

    I wouldn’t put too much stock in that. GBFM gets that way every time we get a new Fed chief.

  91. Anonymous Reader says:

    GBFM gets that way every time we get a new Fed chief.

    I feel his pain. “Yellenized” just does not have the same ring to it as “Bernakefied” does. Still, into every life, some rain must fall.

  92. “@nope. Reality doesn’t work they way you say it does. I too wish it did, but it doesn’t.”

    When all you have are insubstantial points there’s no debate.

  93. jf12 says:

    Women aren’t *sexually* interested in A True Good Man. The SMV for a man is negatively correlated with his MMV in our depraved society. To try to believe otherwise is a noble but futile attempt.

  94. jf12 says:

    Re: headship game. A long long time ago, like maybe a couple of years now, on a social news site far far away, I was miffed about something or other somebody said (maybe something I said, fine, beside the point) and signed up for a free trial match.com matching, to test Dr. Helen Fisher’s supposedly scientific method. I took the long form questionnaire (don’t know if there’s a short form) filling it all out fully exactly correctly including that I was divorced, merely leaving out the one inconvenient truth that I had remarried 22 yrs earlier. My personal blurb/self-description/pina-colada-saying was merely this, entirely truthfully: “I just would like a woman that does what I say, for a change.”, no other qualifiers. Long story short, as a white UMC old 62 man, I was immediately “uniquely” matched with 121 women in the greater Houston area. The oldest was barely 50, and the youngest was in her 20s. By the end of the first day, as I was attempting to erase my profile, the actual replies were trickling in, all promising to do their best to do what I say.

  95. MarcusD says:

    @jf12

    Well, it seems that women are increasingly marrying on the STR characteristics (e.g. physical appearance), rather than the LTR (e.g. providing ability). It has been shown repeatedly that women differentiate between STR and LTR in their assessment of men.

  96. DeNihilist says:

    Zippy – “Also it is important to realize that men fitness test all the time too. When you are the leader, everyone fitness tests you.”

    or as my fishing buddies and I call it, when sitting around the fire in the evening – “taking the piss outta each other”

  97. MarcusD says:

    @jf12

    Here’s the summary of Dr. Helen Fisher’s book:

    “Tomorrow belongs to women,” notes celebrated anthropologist Helen Fisher. In her explosive new book, The First Sex, she illustrates this enticing assertion. Drawing on original research, Fisher reveals how women and their natural talents are changing the world, making them ideal leaders and successful shapers of business and society–today and on into the twenty-first century.

    Looking back to prehistoric times, Fisher shows how the special structure of the female brain enables women to do “web thinking” or “synthesis thinking,” as compared to men’s more linear or “step” thinking. With lively anecdotes and fascinating stories, Fisher reveals how women’s special talents–superior verbal abilities, people savvy, acute senses, healing techniques, and more–are geared to success in today’s worlds of medicine, education, communications, law, philanthropy, and government. Changes in society–the growth of the communications economy and new trends in family–are also giving women an advantage: women’s unique talents are especially needed in our modern age.

    This eye-opening book will change the way you see yourself, your family, and the world around you, including every man and woman you meet.

  98. Women aren’t *sexually* interested in A True Good Man. The SMV for a man is negatively correlated with his MMV in our depraved society. To try to believe otherwise is a noble but futile attempt.

    Easily proved wrong by all of the women in the manosphere who head over heels attracted to their Christian husbands.

    If becoming Christian was unattractive then all of the wives would fall out of attraction with the husbands. Not the case.

  99. jf12 says:

    “Easily proved wrong by all of the women in the manosphere who head over heels attracted to their Christian husbands.” all four or five of them, who were first physically attracted while he was still a bad boy and merely haven’t gotten sufficiently de-attracted yet because he keeps them guessing as to whether he will be bad once again sometime.

  100. all four or five of them, who were first physically attracted while he was still a bad boy and merely haven’t gotten sufficiently de-attracted yet because he keeps them guessing as to whether he will be bad once again sometime.

    I have to admit, I laughed. Right you are, in my case anyway, but you know, not all of us are like that. ;)

  101. jf12 says:

    @Marcus. Besides Fisher’s loosey goosey matching algorithms, there are bindersful of pseudoscientific attempts to scientify mate-finding, e.g. Human Chemistry

    http://books.google.com/books?id=KGaghraz8AUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:human+intitle:chemistry

    I think the “secret” is that most people could be compatiblish enoughish if they decided to be. It would have to be an ugly matrix inversion in which over half the columns felt they were correlated enough with over half the rows, but the rows wanted to be different.

  102. If becoming Christian was unattractive then all of the wives would fall out of attraction with the husbands. Not the case.

    It isn’t his Christianity that I’m attracted to. I appreciate his reliance on God, his prayer life, his ability to give us wise biblical counsel. But just as my obedience to God is found in my submission to my husband regardless of his faith, so is my attraction to him.

  103. jf12 says:

    A bad boy is not without honour (among Christian women) except in his own house, if he started out as a nice guy.

    Although it is an uphill battle, it is possible to change their perceptions without serious transgressions (I think).

  104. jf12 says:

    @SD, repeating myself, women (and/or men) have it easier because a husband DOES find a wife’s submissiveness sexually attractive. And her chasteness aka not slutting around the neighborhood: also sexually attractive. And her fear aka dread of him: also sexually attractive. There is almost nothing a woman can do that a man finds sexually unattractive, except her being contemptuous of him. Which is, I believe, the primary reason that women use contempt.

  105. @ SD

    “It isn’t his Christianity that I’m attracted to. I appreciate his reliance on God, his prayer life, his ability to give us wise biblical counsel. But just as my obedience to God is found in my submission to my husband regardless of his faith, so is my attraction to him.”

    It has never been my assertion that “Christianity” is attractive.

    I’m saying Christian men can build masculine traits, mindset, and habits to be attractive.

    jf12 seems to believe that you need to be a “bad boy” to be attractive. Simply not the case.

  106. If becoming Christian was unattractive then all of the wives would fall out of attraction with the husbands. Not the case.

    In fact the process of a man committing his life to Christ, in my experience, was a “fall out of attraction” time for us. We were both Christians by tradition and if you asked us we’d both tell you “we’re Lutheran”. We did not, however, go to prayer and the Word in everything so we didn’t have the relationship we both have now. Nor the joy. He told me once, after I was emotionally stirred by an alter call that he doesn’t feel like he can commit his life to the Lord yet, as he is still such a sinner. The men and women we were associating with, looking back, were very haughty, what’s that saying – “so heavenly bound they’re no earthly good.” We talked more and more about it and then we went to another service with an alter call. We went forward. The the “thou shants” started. No more swearing, no more “bad” movies, music, drinking, etc. everything was bad bad bad unless it was about God, God, God. But none of these behaviors were of the heart, they were the motions that Christians are supposed to do. It was for only about a few months but he had enough of this emasculating bull crap (thank goodness because if he had continued on and also started taking on the soft feminine voice that so many of these rule followers had, I’d have gone nuts.) He decided enough is enough, “every man has a vice and if I can’t see his vice, it’s likely very ugly. I don’t even want to go down that ugly vice road” Out went the rules and into our home came the heart of Christianity and a very masculine man who will not put his family in the company of emasculated Christian pansies – ever.

  107. new2redpill says:

    @ SD – We were both Christians before our courtship and I entered my dating years having an expectation that headship would be the center of my relationship with my mate.. My ex was not a bad boy when I fell in love with him, so my experience is very different from the path you walked – not better, just a different road. I “grew up” in a church environment where I was taught before I was ever allowed to date about the way I had to respect my husband when he came along. Thus when we did marry, I welcomed what I had been taught was the way a marriage was supposed to be. There were times when I didn’t agree with him at all, but I yielded because that is what a wife is obligated to do. In my mind, the last word was his.

    I believe my cultural prohibition on tolerating actual physical correction would have me heading for the door if he had ever asserted dominance in that way. Right or wrong, fool or not, this I know about myself. But for us it was a moot point because the headship model was preloaded in me before we married.was very, very strongly in place. When he came down with “This is the way we are going to do this.” I never once argued with a “final answer” situation. I might not be happy with it but I had to just swallow hard and get on board or know that I was displeasing God. Since he was very much about headship, had I not been able to do that, we never would have survived. That plus the fact that I never said no when he wanted me is what made us make 23 happy years.

    That is one reason why I really appreciate what Novaseeker said about the demise of the relationship. There was truth in that I hadn’t really considered. I actually ASKED him for approval about the job I took and also about going to graduate school. Had he said no to either situation, I would have followed his headship on the matter. I was even ambivalent initially about applying for the fellowship that made it possible for me to attend school so it is really ironic that he came to hate the results of the very decision upon which he had the final word.

  108. So you’re the one, huh? Feminists often tell me about this woman or that who did everything she ought to do according to Scripture and their husbands just up and left them. (of course they tell me this because they believe that this somehow negates being obedient to God – cuz what’s the point, right?) Sounds like he willingly made the decisions that caused him to stop loving you. A very rare and sad story. Are you still in contact with him? Does he know that he has put you in a position where you must remain single until his death for you to not be an adulteress according to Scripture?

  109. new2redpill says:

    Oh no, SD – I most certainly DID NOT do everything according to the scriptures! See previous post written to Anonymous Reader detailing my many screw ups. God is not to blame for what happened here. Those last three years i was completely off-track. It is just sad that it ended up outweighing the 23 years that went before. I was absolutely clueless and that was certainly not the fault of scripture.

    I believe I do not have to remain single because he resorted to adultery when he “fell out of love.” I would have forgiven him, but he did not want to repair the marriage. I am not in contact with him because he remarried 4 months after the divorce.

  110. You might want to check that with Scripture, hon. His adultery has nothing to do with it.

  111. Boxer says:

    Hey SD:

    Sincere question here, so please don’t take it as nitpicking…

    Does he know that he has put you in a position where you must remain single until his death for you to not be an adulteress according to Scripture?

    Isn’t the scripture clear that when a spouse cheats (I’m not talking “look at porn” type churchian cheating, but the real-deal “banging other people” cheating) that the marriage is dissolved and the other party is blameless?

    It seems to me that Hebrews 13:4 and Matthew 5:32 are both good pointers on this. I am curious as to whether you have a different interpretation.

    Thanks, Boxer

  112. I’m not seeing it in those verses, Boxer.

    Luke 16:18 makes it clear whoever would marry her commits adultery.
    18 “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.

    Then there’s that pesky Romans 7:2-3 2 For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man.

    Infact it looks as though Matthew 5:31-32 verifies what I said:
    31 “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality[e] causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.NKJV

    31 “You have heard that the law of Moses says, ‘A man can divorce his wife by merely giving her a letter of divorce.’ 32 But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. NLT

    I don’t read the NLT but that translation makes it clear that unless it is her unfaithfulness, he causes her to commit adultery. Obviously if she is unfaithful, she has committed the adultery herself. Either way, her husband has made her an adulteress and any man who would marry her would be committing adultery until her husband is dead.

  113. new2redpill says:

    I am aware that many Christians do not recognize the “exception” clause in Matthew as applying to the male, but I do not believe that to be correct. I believe the marriage bond was broken as soon as he started running around. I also believe I had a scriptural obligation to forgive him and work to put the marriage back together, which I tried to do until I found out that he had remarried. That’s on him, not me. I believe I am free to remarry.

    Honestly though, this is probably academic. I have a better chance of getting hit by a bus than finding another Godly husband at this point in life. Contrary to what is said here, I have found there are lots of self-professed “Christian” men who wish to marry but I do not find ones who are practicing Christianity in any serious fashion. I would only want to remarry if I could return to the same headship model I had the first time.

  114. Curious, who filed for the divorce? And, was it uncontested?

  115. Boxer says:

    Dear Sarah’s Daughter:

    Thanks very much for those references. I guess I’m interpreting, from your response, that it is only if the wife commits adultery, that the marriage is dissolved? I honestly hadn’t thought of it that way before. I’ll admit that a strict reading of the verse seems to be open to that interpretation.

    Matthew 5:32

    But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

    But I’m seeing some wiggle room for the common interpretation also. “The cause of fornication” is explicit, but not specific as to who is the actual cause of fornication. Could it not also be interpreted that a husband could “put away his wife, for the cause of fornication” by divorcing his wife to bang other women?

    I would like to think that G-d would have mercy on such a person, if they truly were not the guilty party, but of course I can’t speak for the divine monarch.

    In any event, we don’t seem to disagree on the underlying point. Married people shouldn’t be catting around. I also read this as a prohibition against playas practicing their skills on married women.

    Hebrews 13:4

    Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

    Thanks again for the references. I’d be interested in more thoughts on this.

    Boxer

  116. SD is correct. The verses above there is no recource for women.

    The only other “loophole” there is for women is possibly from 1 Cor 7 to which new2redpill may potentially fall under::

    “12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not [f]divorce her. 13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not [g]send her husband away. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through [h]her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called [i]us [j]to peace. 16 For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?”

    However, God hates divorce so I would really hate to be in that situation.

    Anyone in that situation should be asking themselves this question: Do you want to attempt to play mental gymnastics before the judgment throne? Or are you absolutely sure of your freedom as a believer.

  117. new2redpill says:

    He filed, though I begged him not to. If 8 mos of trying everything plus begging him not to do it didn’t work, contesting it would not have worked either. As he said, “You can get a lawyer and try to do that, but you’ll just end up spending a lot of money and not changing the outcome.” He was right – in our state you really cannot successfully contest. As a matter of fact, they are so wonderfully accommodating in our state that he was granted his divorce just 21 days after he filed.

  118. Pingback: Lightning Round -2014/02/05 | Free Northerner

  119. I would like to think that G-d would have mercy on such a person

    The prohibition to marry a divorced woman is His mercy. Consider what she has said of their marriage. While admirable that she speaks so highly of it, he is indeed still alive. (the words Alpha widow are coming to mind). Perhaps in His wisdom, He knew the trials it brings for a man to marry a divorced woman – for both of them. How would she not compare husband number 2 to husband number 1. She is still bonded to number 1 (“Until Death Parts Us” and “What God has joined together let no one separate”).

  120. new2redpill says:

    Am I absolutely sure of my freedom as a believer?
    Yes, I absolutely am. But as I said, will a true believer ever show up? If he does, I will know it is Divine Intervention and God blessed me with a husband because in today’s climate, that would be like finding a needle in a pile of ten haystacks!

  121. new2redpill says:

    How would I not compare husband number 2 to husband number 1? In the same fashion as if he was dead and I remarried, which no one would question.

  122. jf12 says:

    @Boxer&SD The wiggle room Boxer pretends to discern “I’ll divorce my wife so I can enjoy fornication” is obviously silly, but the attempt to adhere to the strict letter of rules, by letting the man off the hook if the wife commits adultery but not vice versa, killeth. Galatians 3:28 tells us that if there is such a rule then it applies equally, and 1 Cor 7:15 tells us that when the other spouse is to blame for the divorce, then the one that did not want the divorce does not necessarily have to bear ANY burden of the guilt.

    The easiest way out is to strictly forbid divorce and remarriage altogether. That’s my position. See previous two sentences. But that position institutionalizes bondage contrary to the spirit of rules. After it became clear my ex-wife had committed adultery, being clear in my mind that I could remarry, when I did I chose a divorcee whose weird ex abandoned her long ago and she didn’t know if he was dead or alive (he was alive, but is now dead). I deliberately did not give myself any wiggle room, appealing to a frog’s hair of second chance, cutting myself off from the possiblity of getting a third chance.

  123. Boxer says:

    The prohibition to marry a divorced woman is His mercy.

    That is a very (very, very) good, compelling, and interesting point. It’s hard for me to see things from a woman’s perspective, and all of a sudden, I get it…

    I am going to bow out of this conversation now, as I think it’s one that you sisters ought to have, but I appreciate all the calm and measured responses, both to me and to each other, despite the emotions involved.

    Peace! Boxer

  124. You are opening a HUGE can of worms when you use Galatians 3:28 to settle this.

  125. Let me point out something interesting here, for those curious as to the nature of women. new2redpill expressed earlier how the example of my husband asserting his physical dominance over me was something she would not abide nor find attractive. Interestingly though, after her husband had sex with another woman she begged him not to leave; “8 mos of trying everything plus begging” and she “would have forgiven him”. So where asserting physical dominance would not have quelled her rebellion, “one in the kitty” certainly did.

  126. new2redpill says:

    Nope SD, I did not learn of the adultery until 1 month after the divorce so that theory does not apply. I begged him because I do not believe in divorce.

  127. ” I did not learn of the adultery until 1 month after the divorce so that theory does not apply.

    “I also believe I had a scriptural obligation to forgive him and work to put the marriage back together, which I tried to do until I found out that he had remarried.”

    “I am not in contact with him because he remarried 4 months after the divorce.”

    Nope, theory doesn’t apply at all…
    You’re a special snowflake, aren’t you? Part of the trick of snowflaking is to not contradict yourself in one comment thread. If the story is now straight, you begged him and did everything you could for three months after you knew he had sex with someone else. His affair was not a deal breaker as you claimed physical dominance would be.

  128. new2redpill says:

    SD, one other thing in the spirit of complete honesty. After the divorce when I found out about the adultery, I said that I would have forgiven him and I kept talking to him about trying to put it back together, but in my heart of hearts, i just don’t know if I could have submitted to him in the same way as I did before I knew about the adultery.

    It is really, really hard to forgive that kind of betrayal completely. I like to believe my faith would have taken me there but I’m just not 100% sure how I would have felt if he came back and I had to sleep with him again knowing he had been with someone else. I had not discovered this site at that time so I wasn’t even beginning to see things in a red pill light.

    In marrying her 4 mos after the split, he probably did me a huge favor because he took a meal off my plate that I might not have been able to swallow.

  129. I appreciate your responses, this has become more and more interesting to me. Now, I am going to hold you to your word as you are a Christian and have said you’re talking in the spirit of complete honesty. You presume you would not have been able to abide a husband who would assert physical dominance, even if you were in such rebellion as to warrant it, and you assert that it is unclear if you could have forgiven his having had sex with another woman. Did you feel any amount of heightened attraction to him in knowing that another woman found him attractive? I ask this in all sincerity.

    I am also intrigued as to what it was that made you desire a career outside of your home. You were in a biblical marriage, in submission to your husband, I’m assuming that means you were his help meet. Do you know why it happened? It is common, I know, it is just rare that a woman might honestly answer the question so many men would like to know the answer to.

  130. new2redpill says:

    I hate to air this really embarrassing story but since you are calling me a liar, here’s what happened:

    He asked for a divorce in January. I tried to repair the marriage until he moved out in October. Though I begged him not to, he filed Nov 9 and we were divorced Nov 30. I never would have known he cheated except that one month after the divorce, his first mistress showed up to tell the tale, which really fried my eggs The first mistress showed up on Dec 25. Wasn’t that just extra sweet?

    His affair was not a deal breaker because my church teaches that as long as he is free, I cannot remarry and must attempt to reconcile. In obedience to the scriptures, I had to keep trying, so I did. But at that point I sure wasn’t begging. I had anger I had to shove down just to talk to him. And although he married 4 mos after, he kept it a secret. I didn’t discover it until 8 mos had passed, so (weirdly) I ended up continuing to talk to him about reconciling when he was already married. Just extra icing on the cake!

  131. new2redpill says:

    @ SD – I actually wanted to be a stay-at-home mom when we married but he told me that in the financial climate we had, a two income family was a necessity. So at his insistence, I was a working wife.

  132. His affair was not a deal breaker because my church teaches that as long as he is free, I cannot remarry and must attempt to reconcile.

    This church then teaches that once he is remarried you are free to marry again?

    How about that question I had for you about attraction level toward him once you knew other women wanted him.

  133. new2redpill says:

    Actually, once I knew he cheated, my attraction to him instantly changed. I was incredibly ANGRY that he did that to us!

    The church teaches that adultery broke the bond and I am not obligated to continue in marriage. BUT STILL – the most excellent way is to attempt to reconcile – not to simply jump for divorce because he committed adultery. Saying I could not remarry was overstating the case.. i COULD have remarried without trying to reconcile because of the adultery but you are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to allow the Holy Spirit to work towards reconciliation because that would be the Lord’s preference. For me remarriage was not an option because at that point I could be blocking a work of the Lord toward reconciliation since he was still available. Once he remarried, that door closed.

    But you know, now that I think back on it, you had the better part if we are comparing. Your husband behaved honorably with the physical dominance for your good. Mine behaved without honor because in that last year, he was emotionally abusive out of his unhappiness and I had to tolerate that because it is not grounds to leave. So…maybe I’m wrong and you are right. Maybe I would take physical correction IF it was obviously applied in love because it would have to beat that emotional abuse I took that was applied in anger.

  134. Elspeth says:

    Does he know that he has put you in a position where you must remain single until his death for you to not be an adulteress according to Scripture?

    You assume he cares first of all. Why would he?

    Secondly, the vast majority of Christians believe that if a spouse (regardless of gender) leaves and takes up with someone else, the jilted spouse (regardless of gender) is free to remarry.

  135. sunshinemary says:

    He decided enough is enough, “every man has a vice and if I can’t see his vice, it’s likely very ugly. I don’t even want to go down that ugly vice road”

    SD, I’m curious as to how RLB squares that with Romans 6:6-14.

    6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

    5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.

    8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

    11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness. 14 For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.

  136. There’s no need to, what was necessary was to shed from our life the association with the people who seem to believe that along with recommitting your life to Christ you should also get a hand book of everything you can not do if you want to be in good standing in their book without regard to the Bible and the work of the Holy Spirit.

  137. You assume he cares first of all. Why would he?

    No, I assumed she didn’t know just as most women don’t. If they did, if they truly understood what Scripture had to say, they might take seriously their obedience to God in his call for them to submit in all things. If they really understood the consequences of divorce perhaps what they pray for would change a bit, perhaps how they treat the only man they will be married to, until his death would be different, perhaps he’d be treated a bit more precious and not as a roommate.

    I’m not sure how a man on his way out would respond. If a wife reminded him what the Scripture says if it would slow him down from leaving her.

  138. new2redpill says:

    @ SD : We were never “roommates” and it grossed me out later when I found out that he was sleeping with me at the same time as he was sleeping with others. A man who cares so little for what God commands as to commit adultery obviously does not care what scripture says. And he had already left the church and refused to go back .

    His last mistress (now new wife) is a Shaman. He had accepted her as his spiritual guide before leaving and found his new faith more to his liking so the scriptures you refer to had absolutely no bearing on his behavior.

  139. jf12 says:

    Adultery does break the bond. There is no more marriage after adultery. Some other guy saying words or writing on a piece of paper merely confirms the state of non-marriage, not confers it.

    Reconciliation can and ought to be done if BOTH parties voluntarily agree, but it is then a new marriage, not a continuation. If it were a continuation, for example, the aggrieved nonadultery would be OBLIGED to take the adulterer back, refuting the principle of voluntarity.

  140. jf12 says:

    @new2 “A man who cares so little for what God commands as to commit adultery obviously does not care what scripture says. And he had already left the church and refused to go back .” 1 Cor 7:15 applies in spades.

  141. Not just for your situation new2redpill, overall, how many Christians are being lied to by churches /pastors about what these Bible verses say?

    new2redpill, men rarely just go crazy and denounce Christ and start having affairs. Has he been forthcoming to you about what went wrong?

  142. new2redpill says:

    @ SD – No, he was not forthcoming. He is not a communicator. When he sat me down for the divorce talk, I asked him why he did not say something that indicated he was having thoughts of ending the relationship earlier, before it got to that point. He said “I didn’t want to open that can of worms.” I asked him how asking for a divorce was somehow better for me than talking beforehand about how things were going south for him and trying to fix them. I never got an answer to that particular question. He simply said we grew apart and he did not love me anymore. He was 55 at the time. I think it looked like typical midlife crisis behavior, and it was rampant in his workplace. Again, the things I wrote before about my screw ups definitely contributed, but I think it was a combination of those things and his midlife crisis coming to a head, along with his favorite child leaving home which gave him even less reason to stay.

    At that time, since I did not know about the adultery, in my mind if he left I was sentenced to single life for the rest of my life. You can believe during that 8 mos I did EVERYTHING i could to satisfy whatever he expressed. The end result was that he said frog and jumped, but he actually didn’t like that wimpy handmaiden version of me. The personally that attracted him to me in the first place was no longer expressed. Eventually he said, “You can’t continue walking around on eggshells.” He then packed his bags and left. But I was glad that I went through that because at least my children were able to see how hard I tried to save the marriage.

  143. Maeve says:

    Elspeth said “You assume he cares first of all. Why would he?”

    Exactly. A dandy boat to be in!

    Mine has finally decided that he actually wants a divorce (or maybe the GF wants one, who knows?). Anyway, not only does he want one, but he told me to file (provided me with the terms he would agree to) so that all he had to do was be served and wait for the papers to sign. Lovely.

  144. I’m skeptical.

    Whenever SD asks a question that paints her in an unflattering light, there seems to be a new reason why the husband was at fault in some odd way.

    To be honest, all I’m seeing in this whole string of posts is trickle truth. And you know how trickle truth goes.

    26 year long marriages just don’t go to hell over the last 3 years. There’s always something the wife was doing in rebellion (if it was a Christian marriage) to make the man fed up enough to leave the faith. Men just don’t decide to leave their faith they had for 30+ years. Him telling her to work so he wouldn’t have to be around her is only a symptom of that.

  145. jf12 says:

    @DS Me too. Every time I’ve probed there is turbulence surrounding the truth.

  146. I have been from the start, DS. However, if she is sincere and is new to the red pill, and desires to learn, my goal initially was to keep her opinions to herself regarding what another man has done to bring his wife to obedience to God. She had a theory that she would not have respected a man’s physical dominance even if she was in such rebellion as to warrant it. As you can tell, she was able to see the truth after that long exchange. Which I really appreciate her saying. “Your husband behaved honorably with the physical dominance for your good. Mine behaved without honor because in that last year, he was emotionally abusive out of his unhappiness and I had to tolerate that because it is not grounds to leave.”

    Regardless if her story has a bunch that has not been revealed, the takeaway here is that her first stated opinion/feelings, were mutable – as it is with women. While they will say they would never ever tolerate _______, even if ______ is done by a loving husband and completely in accordance with Scripture and his God ordained headship in a marriage, the truth is their words are based out of emotions that have not been filtered through a logical lens. Their words should not be counted as truth and no man should heed them.

  147. new2redpill says:

    SD has an intact marriage. Mine is the one that fell apart. As for the 26 years, he said himself that 23 of those were good so that is where the 3 years comes from. As for working, I worked from day one of the marriage because he felt a 2-income family was necessary. He did not send me to work to get rid of me.

    I posted a long post full of many things that I did wrong that made him not want to stay – making more than him, career over the marriage, excess education, not reaching out enough – I didn’t realize how damaging these things were. Though I felt blindsided, it should not have been a surprise that he left. The things that were his fault – he committed adultery and when I asked him about returning to school for an advanced degree, he said I should and then didn’t like it when I did.

  148. Boxer says:

    @maeve

    Mine has finally decided that he actually wants a divorce (or maybe the GF wants one, who knows?). Anyway, not only does he want one, but he told me to file (provided me with the terms he would agree to) so that all he had to do was be served and wait for the papers to sign. Lovely.

    Speaking as the grown child of a woman who filed, I would caution you strongly not to do this — at least if there are kids in the picture. Get your priest to talk to him if you can. If that’s not a possibility, consider telling him that he is being a whoremonger and that you won’t help him justify his lousy behaviour. He can file the papers himself if he is so hot for whatever ho’ he has found.

    Your kids will figure out who filed and pass judgment accordingly. Neither I nor my sister ever want to hear from our bio mother again. Let that sink in. Divorce is an incredibly traumatic event for kids, and you don’t want to be seen as responsible later.

    Regards, Boxer

  149. @ Maeve

    “Mine has finally decided that he actually wants a divorce (or maybe the GF wants one, who knows?). Anyway, not only does he want one, but he told me to file (provided me with the terms he would agree to) so that all he had to do was be served and wait for the papers to sign. Lovely.”

    I partially agree with Boxer.

    I would say that you won’t do it because divorce is sinful.

    But I wouldn’t be confrontational because that really never work with men. It’s seen as nagging and unfeminine. Instead you should say that you would like to reconcile much in the humility and taking the blame that Abigail did with David:

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Samuel+25

  150. jf12 says:

    Re: Maeve, not @Maeve. I cannot imagine having so compliant a woman that when I told her that she should file for divorce from me because that would be pleasing to me that she would seriously consider it. I cannot believe any woman could be so man-pleasing, nor that any man could pretend to believe so with a straight face. I refuse to believe.

  151. To note, pleading is unattractive. It shows that you know you’ve done something wrong and are trying to make up for it.

    The reality is that we do things wrong and CAN’T make up for it. That’s why we need Jesus as a Savior.

    Coming from a standpoint of humility tells a man (or woman) that you’ve made mistakes, and you know that there’s nothing you can do to make it up. But you’re asking for their grace and mercy for forgiveness. That you would like to reconcile but you understand if they don’t want to because of the things you have done.

  152. new2redpill says:

    @ DS – interesting POV about pleading. One would think that was the ultimate in putting the other person first and you are saying just the opposite. It’s really about the pleader putting their desires first.
    Good to remember. Really wish I’d heard that before I tried begging…

  153. Maeve says:

    While I appreciate the advice that I should pursue a reconciliation, he’s been gone over three years, has a child with his GF, and has expressed on any number of occasions that he has no interest in returning to our marriage. Don’t think there’s much wiggle room there.

  154. @ Maeve

    Sorry to hear that.

    You still shouldn’t enable sin and treat the situation with humility and kindness.

  155. Amanda says:

    Maeve

    I am in no place to advise you in your circumstances, as of course none of us really know all that is involved in your circumstances. I did want to say that I know of two women, both in my church, who were married to unbelieving men who left them and wanted divorce. Both women were counseled not to do the filing, for conscience sake, but rather to let the man since he wanted it. This was a hard road, because sometimes people are not quick to deal rightly in their affairs and with others, but eventually both the men took care of the divorce, and both ladies were happier not to have that on their consciences. I know this may not apply to your situation at all, but thought I’d share. I am sure you a facing a very difficult thing here.

  156. new2redpill says:

    Maeve,

    I am deeply sorry for what you have endured.

    What Boxer said mirrored my own experience. I was surprised to find how much the divorce affected my adult children. Honestly, for faith reasons I would never have filed it anyway, but the fact that my ex did made a difference to my children he did not anticipate and it reverberates still in their relationships with him.

    Just something to consider.

  157. Boxer says:

    Dear Maeve, et. al.:

    I like the Dalrock blog and I visit often, for one reason: Because I hate divorce. I think this is one of the only places I’ve ever found where it is discussed honestly. Of course, other people come here for their own reasons, which often differ from mine, but are no less valid.

    I’m going to be accused of white knighting by some of these people, probably immediately after posting this. I don’t care about this. A lot of suckers talk a lot of shit about me, and a lot of bitches talk a lot of shit about me, and that’s the way I like it.

    I always try not to fall into the trap of blaming women for everything. I don’t think it’s manly to think in a binary fashion, and I don’t think it’s manly to feel like “team man” is always the poor victim in any altercation. If I did that, I’d just be another male feminist, whining and indulging in a weak-minded attempt at groupthink.

    I’ve known many men, over the years, who have dumped good women, as soon as that hot young ho’ at the office dropped her panties. Granted, this is less frequent among married dudes, but I have seen it, with my own eyes. It does happen.

    If I were in a situation similar to what you described, I’d take Deep Strength’s advice (he gave much better advice than I did) and approach the situation from a position of humility. This is a feminine strength and your husband is hard-wired to respond to it. I think that I would write a letter, rather than tell him stuff in person, moreover. Something like:

    Dear [Name of Husband]

    Thank you for your request of [date] to file for divorce. I am sorry for whatever I did, or left undone, to bring you to the point that made you feel divorce is necessary. Unfortunately, while I realize that you are being very generous, I am going to have to decline your offer on ethical [religious, etc.] grounds.

    I made a vow on [date of wedding] that I would love, honor and obey you, until death. I intend to stay faithful to my vow. Since then, we have had [number] children, [insert names] and I believe that it is in these children’s best interests that I do not file for divorce. [insert stats here]

    You get the idea. No demands, no judgment, no conflict, just refusal to do what you know is wrong. He can file for divorce himself.

    Best, Boxer

  158. Elspeth says:

    I am stunned beyond belief that you are all actually blaming new2redpill for her husband’s freely made choice to commit adultery and leave his marriage to be with someone else.

    I’m as hard on women as anyone on my blog, but seriously folks, this is heresy. Every person has to stand for their faith and do what’s right. If the woman says they had a decent marriage, he met someone else, and wanted out, why can’t that just be the case?

    If a man came on here and said such a thing he’d get sympathy and consolation and denouncement of his wife’s evil behavior, and rightly so. No one would question what he may have done to make it easier for her to leave the faith.

    I expect some of that from those who don’t confess Christ, but to hear Christians do this is very disheartening. Sometimes men frivorce too.

  159. Elspeth says:

    Heh. I should have just co-signed what Boxer said in order to avoid being accused of pushing the Feminine Imperative.

    At least a man said it first.

  160. @ Elspeth

    Who’s blaming?

    The only thing I can see is trickle truth (which doesn’t usually bode well for the woman), and it’s hard to get an idea of “who is at fault” when you don’t have both sides of the story. 99.9999% of the time there’s two people at fault when a relationship blows up anyway.

  161. new2redpill says:

    @ DS RE: trickle truth

    Please refer back to my post in this thread to Anonymous Reader which very frankly detailed my numerous, numerous faults that contributed to the divorce. I did not flinch in stating all the ways in which I ignorantly failed my ex in the marriage, and if you are counting, it was quite a list – because there is no denying that I carried way more in the blame department. As I said, I was the very bad combination of self-centered and clueless. After 3 years of that he no longer loved me and just wanted out.

    He was a victim, but he was not totally blameless. He had three problems: (1): he was a poor communicator. He never said anything about his obviously rising displeasure but then even in the good times he was always a man of very few words. .(2) When I came to him to talk about returning to graduate school, I wasn’t sure what to do because it was a great opportunity but I was tired of going to school He told me to apply for the fellowship and see what happened. Later, during marital counseling, he mentioned that he didn’t want me to go. Really? Then why tell me to apply? (3) He had several affairs. Yes, I know I failed him in many ways. Yes, I know he was unhappy and justifiably so.. But adultery? That just should not have happened.

    Call it trickle truth, or dismiss it in whatever manner you like. The beauty of the truth is that even if you don’t believe, it still remains the truth.

    As I said before, he was a really good husband and father for 23 years. I still send him a Father’s Day card each year (they actually make those for ex husbands) because despite where we ended up I will never cease to honor all that he was in those 23 years.

  162. Elspeth says:

    @ Deep Strength:

    I agree completely that it takes two to ruin a relationship. It was never my intent to imply that there was nothing New2Redpill couldn’t have done differently. Be that as it may, she was willing to do the work and make the necessary changes to keep the family together. He was not, and there is nothing that should excuse that. I continue to believe that if she were a he, she would have been given due credit for that.

    Who’s blaming?

    But both you and SD repeatedly hinted that her husband’s behavior necessarily stemmed from some deficiency in her as a wife. As if there is any legitimate reason for adultery and family abandonment. Case in point:

    ” There’s always something the wife was doing in rebellion (if it was a Christian marriage) to make the man fed up enough to leave the faith. Men just don’t decide to leave their faith they had for 30+ years. Him telling her to work so he wouldn’t have to be around her is only a symptom of that.”

    That was in fact, what inspired my comment. A person who is determined to walk uprightly will do so. He or she doesn’t get to blame someone else for their sin. God isn’t going to buy that and neither should we.

  163. Ah, I see. I was too harsh in that comment. I apologize to you both.

  164. Really Elspeth? Her name is “new to red pill”, her first exchange with me was classic to feminist trolls. Do you remember “T”?
    I am VERY slow to believe women’s stories. And have learned how to find the truth in these stories. I could care less to make a judgement about her. this has nothing to do with me. My life doesn’t change one bit whether she or her husband was a heathen or a saint. I have neither disdain, pity, or concern for her life. She is a stranger to me. She demonstrated a perfect example of what is taught in these parts and that is to not take women at their words. It is my hope that in being “new to red pill” she is still seeking knowledge. It is my hope that she saw her duplicity in the comment section. Her immediate knee jerk reaction that has been rooted in feminism that she doesn’t even realize. If it caused her to stop and think for just one moment, I have served a purpose. One more woman *might* consider thinking before she speaks.

    Get off the flippin high horse of what you have deemed to be Christian behavior. You have seen me around these parts for a long time and yet do not take me in good faith. You and I agree on many many things Elspeth. We both have things to bring to the table. If you do not like the method I use to suss out genuine commenters amid the sea of feminist trolls derailing the discussion into the typical NAWALT crap, then you are welcome to scroll on by as to spare yourself from having been disheartened. I will not be changing my ways anytime soon. New2redpill will determine for herself what she desires more of right now, she is also free to respond to me or scroll on by as well. I think she’s demonstrated well she’s not in need of rescuing.

  165. Marissa says:

    We only saw each other one night a week for that 3 years because of the schedule.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but you and your husband had sex one night a week (if that) for three years?

  166. JDG says:

    Sometimes men frivorce too.

    Yep! I know of three cases personally, and those men were wrong. Still I’ve never heard a guy say he was leaving a woman because he ‘didn’t lover her’ any more.

  167. Boxer says:

    JDG sez:

    Still I’ve never heard a guy say he was leaving a woman because he ‘didn’t lover her’ any more.

    I have a family member who moved out on his wife after a very long term marriage. Once he was living in his new house, he started mouthing off about how he had been sick of her crap for years, what a raging bitch she was, etc. blah blah. Funny thing was, I had seen him less than a year before the breakup, and he seemed perfectly content and on good terms with her. Even then (I was a teenager) I thought this sort of nonsense was a bit over-the-top.

    About a year after moving out of his home, his divorce was final and all of a sudden he got married to new bitch. Surprise, surprise… She worked with him, and had been transferred to his office shortly before he realized that he had been unhappy in his marriage for so many years (lol).

    Oh, he spun such a good story, about how he and new bitch were so in love, and she was so wonderful, etc. She was a lot younger than first wife, and I remember she was fairly goodlookin’, so I had to give it to him there.

    The wife he dumped was not bitter or angry, but it was clear she was very hurt. This woman was, by anyone’s standards, a good wife. These two had children together. I remember she always kept house well, her kids were decent, etc.

    Fast forward to a couple of years ago… You’re not going to believe what happened. Wait for it… You ready? Wife number two took him to the cleaners in divorce court! I bet you never saw that coming, did you?

    I talk to these people’s kids (they’re my age). It seems the hero in this story is in something of a solitary confinement state, living alone in a house in his middle age years. During the holidays, Wife number one invites him over to have meals with her, the kids, and her new husband. No, I’m not kidding. My hat’s off to her for being so forgiving.

    I love the guy. He’s a blood relative. But, we pay for our mistakes, and he is paying for his.

    Like attracts like, and everyone gets what they deserve in this life.

  168. Elspeth says:

    @SD:

    I take you in good faith, and I too am cautious about believing the stories people tell online, and I’m sure many feel the same way about me.

    But I try very hard to take what is presented and comment on that. I have see New2redpill around for a bit now but didn’t make the connection that she was “T”.

    My only problem with what was said was that seemingly unshakable belief that it is impossible for a man to meet someone else and bail unless his wife is doing something wrong. I just can’t get with that SD, Sorry.

  169. new2redpill says:

    Believe it, don’t believe it. I still lived it.

    SD, I will tell you that I have been around a while. When I came to this list, I posted under a different moniker. I changed my handle on here only to protect my ex from public outing because at one point I accidentally used my real name in a post.. And I can tell you Dalrock initially thought I was a troll as well and monitored me for a while until it became clear that wasn’t the case.

    I became a Christian independently in my early teens through outreach at a Charismatic church.(a Calvary Chapel) and I consider myself “raised” in that church. I came from a home where my mother was absolute matriarch. Once I became a Christian, I came to believe the way that my parent’s marriage was constructed was not correct in terms of the way God orders marriage. Mama’s word was law and she always had the last word. I’m sure you will not be surprised when I tell you that Daddy left her when I was 19. We (kids) were all pretty traumatized by that loss. I became determined that when I married, I would not structure my marriage in that way. Yet I will tell you that when I did begin to date, I tended to “attract” men who were easily controlled. Though muted by my faith, my relationships still emulated my parent’s marriage. My husband was the first man I dated that did not allow me to control. I fell for him instantly and we married after just 4 mos of dating. We were together for many happy years and raised 3 wonderful children.

    What upset the apple cart was that in 2004 my employment changed from nurse (in a very passive, follower job) to academic (college instructor) and graduate student. As you well know, It is a very different thought environment and I spent a lot of time in it. Unfortunately, this change coincided with the effective removal of my husband’s headship presence from the home because he got the new job where he worked nights and I worked days. I worked hard to get ahead at my job. I got promoted at work to a position of responsibility. I became more independent. in action and thought. I was home alone every day. Gradually, there was a subtle shift in the dynamic of the relationship. I did not become my mother, but I was definitely less submissive than I had been. This was hard for my husband,. But that realization on my part was part of the autopsy of the marriage. i didn’t see it as it was happening. On top of that his new job where he worked nights involved travel away from the home quite often for training classes. It is no accident that his first affair was a woman he met on one of his 3 week training trips.

    i know that DS was suspicious that the marriage came apart in 3 years, but that is what happened. After a couple of years of travel trips and seeing each other only one night a week (his day off), we became very disconnected as a couple. There had been a few other women by that time, but I was still oblivious because we spent so little time together. On one of his trips he met new wife, a flight attendant / model.. He was quietly but actively seeking someone else by that time and she was willing to be sought out. It didn’t take long for that relationship to come together. He hadn’t been happy for a while. She was younger with a better body and offered none of the stress of his increasingly more independent and strong-minded wife. He wanted a woman like he married, not the one I was becoming. Love quickly grew, and I was not suspicious about the fact that he was working more and more “overtime.”

    I was shocked and devastated when he sat me down for the divorce talk, but in retrospect, I should not have been. All the clues were there, but i did not see the danger. I will never forget his words: “We can’t go back 25 years and be the people we were. I can’t be the man you want me to be. I’ve tried, and that’s just not who I am. I don’t love you anymore and I want the chance to be in love again. I want a divorce.” That was his truth. The only lie in that statement was that he wanted “the chance” to be in love again. Reality was, he already was in love, and he was leaving me for her, though I did not know it. He did not want to try and put the relationship back together. He reluctantly gave in to a few sessions of church counseling for appearances sake, but he refused to return to church and he terminated counseling without accepting any of the direction designed to put the marriage back together.

    I’d been divorced for almost 2 years when I stumbled into a posting here. I started out very badly because I didn’t understand a thing about the manosphere and right away made the mistake of posting about how I was on the other side because I had been betrayed by a husband who dumped me because he wasn’t haaappy. Yeah. I bet you can guess how that went. It was feeding time in the shark tank.

    I might have just gone away mad, but for Novaseeker who eventually intervened and patiently explained the error of my ways. He helped me to start seeing things differently. I remember the way he was congratulated for his successful “hamster wrangling” when I began to see the light. Later, Deti explained what I didn’t know about the change in the church and how it has ruined marriage in this country. He helped me begin to understand that sadly, the church I “grew up” in does not really exist anymore and the teachings I was trying to live by were no longer being taught in the church of today. I remember crying a lot that day because I realized that I was single in an environment that just doesn’t make sense anymore.. I am grateful to both those men for beginning my instruction because they were really the only two who were interested in helping me to make sense of what happened instead of just having fun tearing me a new one,

    SD, my reaction to you was indeed cultural. Abuse was pretty common in the neighborhood where I grew up. We were taught early on in my mother’s house to NEVER let a man put his hands on you. I was thinking abuse, not loving correction, I flashed back to things I’d seen when I was growing up. I was horrified and I immediately reacted in a visceral way.. My apologies. Of course you were not talking about the same thing. Unfortunately I spoke before reflecting. I should have asked questions before speaking and I’m sorry about that, but I am still finding my way. However, my brief comment to you was only a small part of my total postings in this exchange, In general, it’s probably a good idea to look at all the evidence before making a hard line judgment. I do want to learn, and I am not interested in causing problems. Learning is an up and down process. No one who is learning gets it right every time.

  170. I have seen your story play out in the real world. A wife/mother and husband agree that her further education will help the family. The long hours of graduate school or in one real life example an accelerated nursing degree program take their toll and life starts to fall apart at home. Wife/mother is too busy, too invested to see what is going on. From the outside it is obvious. The mistake is made when we believe our marriage is established and not a relationship that needs our most precious commodity, time. We see it clearly in raising children, when a child has virtually no time with one parent, the relationship suffers – the child suffers the absence of that relationship. But for some reason, across the world, married couples fail to see that even strong marriages will suffer when you remove time spent together.

    Men and women both buy the lie. Often times the woman is seeking more, and the man mistakenly gives her what he presumes will make her happy. Sometimes, as in the case with a friend of mine, they both see dollar signs and a future with no challenge because there will be so much money. He can get his boat, they can get a new house, new cars etc. And they trade time, something they can never get back, for money for the low low price of one failed marriage and devastated children.

    I have an acquaintance who is in the process of doing this very thing. She is married to a junior NCO in the Army, they don’t make much money but enough to sustain a comfortable life, they have two grade school daughters, she’s battled cancer for the last several years and is in remission and what is she most excited about right now? Her husband has told her that he is okay with her finishing her dream of getting her graduate degree. There will be no convincing her that her dream is seriously messed up. She has escaped death, so far, from cancer and for some reason she doesn’t see that sowing every minute God has given her on this earth into her loved ones should be her dream. I’ve never attended a funeral where the husband or children said anything about how grateful they were for all the time away from home mom spent pursuing her dream – that wasn’t them.

    My hope for you, new2redpill, is that you will use your story as a warning for young women, especially daughters/daughters-in-law.

  171. jf12 says:

    @JDG “Still I’ve never heard a guy say he was leaving a woman because he ‘didn’t lover her’ any more.” It WAS the classic alpha move, like Percy Bysshe Shelley. The kind of man who broke a lot of girls’ hearts, picked one at random to marry and had affairs.

  172. jf12 says:

    @new2 “I was on the other side because I had been betrayed by a husband who dumped me because he wasn’t haaappy.” This is why we keep some grains of salt handy, because of the gender flip. Yes, it happens, but in my/our/reality’s uniform experience it only happens with alpha men who were cheating all along, or, keeping one eye on SD & DS’s inconvenient truth, a less-alpha man who begins cheating after a long time of being cut off by his wife.

  173. new2redpill says:

    SD, that is a PERFECT summation, and it is of course spot-on in terms of what happened, right down to both myself and my husband buying into the idea that we would have more money and a better life once I finished school. Yeah. That worked well, right?

    My daughter unfortunately is very steeped in independent young woman. Though we butted heads for years on the issue, I am ashamed to say I was unable to stop her from becoming a carousel rider – something that grieved both my ex-husband and myself greatly. We feared she would never settle down but by some good fortune, at the age of 35 she met and married a wonderful young man who truly loves her. She has been married one year. Sadly, I fear it might not last because she does not really believe in headship. I love her, but she is often so out of bounds in the marriage. I see her often challenge and try to control her husband. She has no hesitation to do that in front of me or the rest of the family. He has been very patient with her (though his temper will flare after a time of her nagging) but I don’t believe his patience will be without limit. I really hope she will calm down or she may burn him out. She does not listen well on this point though. I don’t really know how to help her.

    Now with my daughter-in-law, it is the totally opposite situation. She is a stay-at-home Mom who yields to my son’s leadership. However they are not Christians and so lack the mediating of the Holy Spirit in their interactions. The danger is that my daughter-in-law also has a bit of independent young woman in her. My son is pretty highly Alpha and don’t think he would tolerate much expression of strong willed woman. Hopefully she will remain in submission and keep their family together. They have two young children. The contribution I get to make in this situation is that even though they don’t believe, within the last year they began to allow me to take the little girls to church and this gives me both hope and great joy.

  174. new2redpill says:

    “Correct me if I’m wrong, but you and your husband had sex one night a week (if that) for three years?”
    “Yes, it happens, but in my/our/reality’s uniform experience it only happens with alpha men who were cheating all along, or, keeping one eye on SD & DS’s inconvenient truth, a less-alpha man who begins cheating after a long time of being cut off by his wife.”

    LOL!
    First, we are in our 50′s. One night a week at that age is not too shabby, but we actually averaged better than that. Secondly, the schedule assured that we were only able to go out to dinner or a movie one night a week. We still slept in the same bed every night. We were able to exercise the benefits of marriage as often as the urge hit him. So no – he wasn’t cut off.

    The problem was emotional distance. Sex is not the same when you lose emotional connection. It still ends the same, but it loses that emotional/spiritual jolt that makes it so inviting. Eventually there was just so much distance between us that going to dinner was actually painful. We sat there, unable to figure out anything to say. Naturally under those conditions, the sex came to have far less impact than it did when we were deeply “in love.” He wanted that heady intoxication back in his sex life. Unfortunately instead of looking to rekindle it in the marriage, he looked for it through affairs, and when he felt he found it again, he left.

  175. new2redpill says:

    Is there such a thing as something written which communicates the need for headship or domination in male/female relationships that is not written from a biblical perspective but perhaps from a more naturalistic perspective?

  176. Anonymous Reader says:

    Is there such a thing as something written which communicates the need for headship or domination in male/female relationships that is not written from a biblical perspective but perhaps from a more naturalistic perspective?

    http://marriedmansexlife.com/

    Athol Kay is a self proclaimed atheist who propounds a “Captain / First Officer” model for marriage. He does “coaching” for couples, as well. Arguably that’s one of the places for a naturalistic perspective more or less, in a form that won’t totally alienate a modern woman (Heartiste, Rationalmale, Return of Kings, etc.).

    Kay’s wife is involved in the site as well, so it is more of a couples-oriented site.

  177. Anonymous Reader says:

    Novaseeker on his own marriage
    But at the time I was entirely clueless and pretty much made every single mistake in the book capable of being made when it comes to women (and we were both church-attending (and active in church activities) virgins at marriage, too – didn’t help when we each made so many other mistakes).

    There’s a common error that people of above average intelligence make, and that is to assume that they somehow are smart enough to ignore common sense with impunity. Probably because often it is true, or true enough – like the bright high school student who puts off studying until the night before a test, only to successfully cram to the exam, these people can get in the habit of ignoring folk wisdom, real traditional wisdom, religious wisdom, and so forth. BTDT.

    It’s pretty easy when one is good at passing exams, doing projects, etc. to assume that one’s own spiffy intelligence is more than a match for any old set of rules, especially when nobody really explains what the rules mean or why they are even in existence. Doubly so when we all believe stuff that simply isn’t true, such as that men and women are interchangeable and there’s no big reason why a woman can’t live just like a man in terms of career. Because, heck, aren’t smart people above all that back-of-the-head nonsense? Eh…no. Not at all. Can it be demonstrated? Yes, via the glasses / red pill / Game knowledge. High intelligence women still want a man, and they want a man who is taller than they are. High intelligence men still want a woman with the right proportions.

    Sometimes a higher than average intelligence just means a man or woman is better at rationalization, rather than rational thought. If the last 40 years have taught us anything, they should have taught us we humans ain’t nearly as smart as we think we are.

  178. Pingback: Friday Links, Fit Friday, and Learning Domesticity in a Post-Feminist World | Sunshine Mary

  179. Boxer says:

    Joining Anonymous Reader: Another quick thumbs up for Athol Kay. His work is very sound and his resources on the web are free to low-cost, and they will not offend women, though his materials do encourage women to take responsibility for their own mistakes, so they will probably offend radfems and other ultra sensitive ninnies.

    The people on the Dalrock blog are quite diverse, by the way. I’ve always been secular and there are other non-Christians here. The only pill you have to swallow here is the ability to be open to the fact that there is wisdom in the texts. I’ve started appreciating the Bible (and, for that matter, Qur’an too) a lot since reading this blog. It’s not by accident that society was much more stable and healthy a few generations ago, when people took the advice of the ancients a bit more seriously.

  180. jf12 says:

    @new2 “Is there such a thing as something written which communicates the need for headship or domination in male/female relationships that is not written from a biblical perspective but perhaps from a more naturalistic perspective?” Me Tarzan, you Jane.

  181. Pingback: The Godly Masculinity Compendium | Donal Graeme

  182. new2redpill says:

    “Me Tarzan, you Jane..” ROTFLOL!
    Only problem with that is many “independent, modern women” seem to think they can arm wrestle for the role of Tarzan.

  183. jf12 says:

    Re: “arm wrestle for the role” Lemme show you this new hold I’ve been working on.

  184. Pingback: Romance 101: How to stop frustrating your wife. | Dalrock

  185. jf12 says:

    I would really really like some explicit blow-by-blow accounts of how Headship Game can actually turn things around for a beta husband and brawling and contentious wife. It’s great that one guy pinching his wife’s rear end harder made the huge ship of marriage correct course instantly. And it’s great that another guy was pleased that his ongoing strategy of still ignoring his wife, rattling the newspaper to shut her up, finally started working after twenty years of it not working. But I mean actual examples, narratives.

  186. Some Guy says:

    You won’t get one from me.

    The application of game in any form results in me being accused of being cocky, of being a jerk, of objectifying women, of hating women, of being crude or crass, of being insensitive. My place is to earn money for her to spend, to do chores, and to do the dishes. If I do anything that indicates I am masculine or that I would like to be part of a romantic relationship with my wife, I am slapped down quickly back to where I belong. Rebellion against the lines she’s drawn will quickly summon either a threat of divorce or an accusation of abuse.

    If I scoff at her thoughts on politically correct talking points, then I don’t respect her as a person. If I don’t want to jump through her hoops, this is proof that I don’t love her and that I don’t want to “work on the relationship.” If I want to talk about actually reconciling over our differences and restoring our marriage to what it should be, well… “you can’t negotiate love” she tells me. Besides, I have to demonstrate that I would be content “just being friends” with my wife forever in order to be worthy of a “real” relationship.

    Her feelings are the ultimate source of legitimacy… and her theology indicates that I am responsible for them. According to her, I broke this relationship… and it’s my job to fix it.

    Probably the one thing that game has effected is… that my wife no longer talks about how I need to “lead” her. That canard died a quick death when I started calling her bluff. Just understanding what’s going on, though, means that she can’t bully me around like she used to. She demands complete fealty in all things and will use the threat of divorce to win arguments. She can’t do that as in quite as subtle a manner anymore because I will call her on it every time. But that’s not game.

  187. Marissa says:

    Some Guy, that sounds utterly miserable. The claustrophobic horror of your “marriage” sounds unbearable. Is there any way for you to start shielding your assets before the inevitable divorce? It sounds like she will ultimately go nuclear on you.

  188. jf12 says:

    “But that’s not game.” It is the beginning of game, the impetus to, the calling to Dread Game. It is your destiny.

  189. Some Guy says:

    My faith and my vows are my undoing. There is no honorable means of protecting myself open to me. I will stand by my children until the bitter end. If she wants to remove me from their lives and renounce our marriage, then that sin will be on her on not me. If she isn’t bluffing and she actually crosses that line, then I will finally disown her. But even then, I will not remarry until she dies.

  190. jf12 says:

    I’m not quite one year into Dread, and currently doling out cuddles and dish-doings etc as STRICTLY ex post facto rewards for her good behavior, including sex. But the instigation of Dread caused me to fall out of love, so I don’t really care except abstractly that she is finally cooking more meals and putting away more laundry. And it is pleasing physically that she responds to my increased brutishness with slightly more sex than before.

    But before, when I was in love, I was highly flirty all the time with her, and although she usually responded negatively, at least she responded. Now, my being flirty isn’t pushing any of her buttons, but I’m finding other women extremely, very incredibly extremely, receptive. It seems the typical playa approach, i.e. being flirty WITHOUT being in love, is the skeleton key that open all pre-menopausal women’s lock.

  191. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Though not exactly an example of Headship game, I had a bit of success I can relate.

    Long story short, my relationship was blue pill, though I’d started studying red pill sites in response to the inevitable decline following the blue pill caused in our marriage. I figured I’d have to break out of that death spiral at some point, and the moment came the third time she mentioned how she really didn’t want to get divorced. At that point, I took out the divorce papers for our state, told her to fill them out, and I’d be happy to file them. If she wasn’t going to fill them out, I didn’t want to hear another word out of her about our divorce, hypothetical or otherwise. And no, I wasn’t bluffing. I was ready to leave at that point, because I figured it was only a matter of time before she nuked us anyway.

    She was brought up short, in part because she was still in the “dip her toe in the divorce pool to get used to the idea” phase, but I forced her to either jump in or get out.

    At that point, I also made changes to my behavior that were more inline with red pill thinking. Not letting her drive me anywhere, lots of kino and dominance crap, etc. Seems to be working. Our relationship is better, though I’m having to deal with the bitterness and resentment of being something I’m not in order to tell God I made a good faith effort to keep the marriage from being severed.

  192. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    @jf12- Ah, nevermind. You’re living the dream, too.

  193. jf12 says:

    Re: “I’m having to deal with the bitterness and resentment of being something I’m not”. The advice to Just Be Yourself now brings bitter laughter instead of impotent rage.

  194. deti says:

    I’ve related my story elsewhere but I’ll do it in truncated form as best I can here.

    Marriage for 15 years, mostly well and OK, but sex of decreasing frequency and enthusiasm. Like Nova I had made with Mrs. deti just about every mistake you can make with a woman. I had put on weight, hating my job, submitting to her frame, compliment and cuddle, etc. She was showing more and more signs of lack of attraction but I had no idea. I started to get the idea because a few months before the blowup I stumbled onto Roissy’s site and from there to a number of others, including this one.

    One morning she was fighting with me and publicly disrespected me, in front of the kids, on the way into church. At home she told me that sometimes she wasn’t physically attracted to me. After a time, I sat her down and told her that if she was so unhappy with me, perhaps she’d be happier without me. I told her I would protect myself by any means necessary; and that this marriage didn’t have to continue. I told her I would not remain married to her under current circumstances and conditions; and that if things did not change immediately, I would end our marriage.

    And I was willing to do so – I was willing to walk that all the way out to a divorce, if my basic requirements weren’t met. Did that free me up for remarriage? No. Did that mean certain financial ruin? Probably. But at that point, divorce and living alone in peace (albeit in relative lack and poverty) would have been preferable.

    Since then we’ve had other conversations along the same lines. It’s better. We have more sex; she is more satisfied with our marriage (at least openly). I do what I think is best within the marriage and for it; I take on the headship role and require that Mrs. Deti submit to it. I listen to her opinions and counsel and input; but I won’t make what I believe prayerfully is a wrong decision that she insists on. I insist on frequent sex because I want it and because I’m entitled to it, and if I don’t receive it, consequences will follow.

    Like Cautiously, I’m amazed at how Game techniques have worked. I’m disappointed in that I’ve had no choice but to become a man that my own parents and society trained me not to be. I’m disappointed and disgusted in our societal institutions for completely and utterly failing men in not teaching them ANYTHING about female nature, because women don’t want to feel bad and because sexism.

    I’m disappointed and disgusted in the nature of women. As a sex, it causes me to not like them much and to pity them at the same time. It makes me understand why we men are commanded to love them; and not respect them. They desperately need men’s love; and there’s not much there to respect. It really is true that women are flat out lying when they say they want good, nice, devout Christian men. They don’t. They want masculine men who don’t put up with their shit and who take what they want. It really is true that women don’t know what they want in men, from each other, or for their lives. It really is true that when a woman is left to her own devices, she invariably is ruled by the tingle and makes a mess of her personal and professional life. It really is true that their emotions rule them; and they need men (fathers, older brothers, husbands) to ground and center them. It really is true that assholes sexually excite women. Masculinity and Game actually work. I’m disappointed that masculinity and occasional asshole Game do exactly what they say they do – they bring the tingle; they excite and stimulate; they corral the woman’s emotions and make them more manageable and controllable.

  195. jf12 says:

    Make or break for Dread is her behaving as though she knows he could have another woman any time he decides to.

    I kind of figured out some months ago there would have to come a time to rub her nose in it, so she would have no excuse, but my heart hasn’t been in it yet. These couple of months of commenting (only two months!) have been a welcome distraction.

  196. deti says:

    Someguy:

    I’ve been pretty close to your situation. The difference is that my use of masculinity and Game caused (or at least contributed to, or catalyzed) a turnaround. Yours apparently hasn’t.

    Like you, I’m opposed to divorce on moral grounds. In my marriage, with my wife’s open rebellion, refusal to submit, power grabs, and maltreatment of me, we were headed toward divorce anyway. I had been hanging around the manosphere a couple of months by the time of this blowup. When it happened, I had a rudimentary understanding of the dynamics at play. I had to do SOMETHING. I knew that had she continued on that course, one or both of the following would have happened: (1) she would have frivorced me for unhaaaaappiness; or (2) she would have cheated and either divorced me, or forced me to divorce her.

    I had reached the point where I truly didn’t care if the marriage survived or not. The kids were the only reason even to try to continue. If it had come to that, living in poverty and having my wages garnished at a 50% rate would truly have been preferable (at least for me if not for the kids) to continuing to live with a woman who plainly hated me and disrespected me.

    Everyone has to do what they feel is best. For me, at that point, things were either going to turn around and improve; or they would end. There were no other viable alternatives. I had no alternative but to bring things to a head right then and there, and force her to make a choice. I was simply accelerating the inevitable.

  197. deti says:

    Someguy:

    I know you’re not asking for advice. But, if I were in your shoes, and Mrs. Deti were threatening divorce, I’d tell her to file and help her select her lawyer. If she were threatening to leave, I’d help her pack, call her a cab, and spring for one-way airfare to the domestic destination of her choice.

    If she thinks she’s being “abused”, tell her to call the cops and make sure to take cell phone pictures of her doing so, so you can document the absence of bodily injuries.

    If she says you don’t respect her as a person because you scoff at her politically correct views, tell her that you don’t respect her views because they’re wrong, and she’s wrong.

    If she says you won’t do what I want and therefore don’t want to work on the relationship, I’d agree with it. I’d tell her I won’t work on the relationship the way it is because I don’t want it the way it is.

    If she says “you can’t negotiate love” when you talk about reconciling and having a marriage, tell her that it’s clear she neither loves you nor respects you, and thus you aren’t married.

    If she refuses sex, tell her “No sex, no marriage. No sex, no provisioning. No sex, no earning money for you to spend. If you’re not going to be a wife, I’m not going to be a husband.”

    I’d quit all housework and dishwashing. I’d simply tell her “if it’s my job to earn the money, it’s your job to take care of the house. I’m holding up my end of the bargain. You hold up yours.”

    I’d tell her that if she so much as threatens divorce again, she won’t have to file, because I will, and it will be total, all out war, because she’s already declared war on me.

  198. Some Guy says:

    @deti,

    I’m glad things worked out for you and I admire you for it.

    There are some lines I can’t cross, there are some things I can risk, there are some things I can’t entertain due to the way I established this marriage, and there is physical and mental damage that makes my wife both typical and unique at the same time.

    I ignored red flags… and in fact thought better of myself as a person for doing so. I did not understand how short a shelf life a woman’s love has and I grossly underestimated my need to protect myself from the get go. I was genuinely surprised by how little regard a woman can have for her children and her commitments. And I spent years squandering what little respect I had left from her by devoting myself to jumping through every hoop that she and the counselors could come up with. I believed at the time that it was what was required of my to fulfill my duty to love her as Christ loved the church. But it was a scam that was built on her hope that I would fold or cheat on her first… and the truth finally outed when she demanded one counselling exercise too many.

    I count the months that I am able to provide my children with an intact home. My wife is a more powerful negotiator than me because she cares about that less than me. She needs my help in everything… but she has to keep me tame and at arms length because even my underweight geekiness is too threatening and manly for her to tolerate– and the drum beat of the rape culture makes her feel infinitely righteous about this.

    I would be better off had I been more like you sooner, but I’m afraid that guys like me have no business getting married and procreating in the current climate. Marriage to the sloppy seconds crowd was about all we could manage in the first place… but we just can’t hold this sort of thing down without backing from culture or the church. And that stuff is long gone, replaced with the enmity of guilty-until-proven-innocent knee-jerk mob.

    Every ounce of my chivalry and romanticism has been completely burned up in this affair.

  199. jf12 says:

    “I ignored red flags… and in fact thought better of myself as a person for doing so. I did not understand how short a shelf life a woman’s love has and I grossly underestimated my need to protect myself from the get go.” I literally have never known any woman that wasn’t completely encircled by red flags of rebelliousness etc. In my case I didn’t think I was ignoring them, just discounting them as expected and ordinary and unavoidable. Up until recently my measure of a man’s manliness was his ability to take unwarranted guff from women. Naturally, this convenient untruth (take that, Al Gore!) marked me as the World’s Manliest Man.

    Keep in mind that the way Christ was recorded as demonstrating His special love (John 2:17) for the Temple was with a whip . He sat down in full view of those who needed whipping, and slowly constructed a whip, probably hefting it at times to see where it needed some more cords. The mere threat of whipping, even from Christ Himself, was of no effect, and He had to arise and go all Dread on them.

  200. Some Guy says:

    Yeah, Christ really did that. Zeal for his father’s house had eaten him up and he turned out the people that had turned the temple into a racket. And my wife has been led astray by people such as that. And they recast every Christian doctrine such that her feelings become the standard of truth and even Christ Himself is reduced to a devoting boyfriend that is carefully gelded and corralled into the friend zone.

  201. Elspeth says:

    i don’t really have anything to say in response to the advice you’re getting Some Guy. Well I do, but my opinion is decidely irrelevant. I do think someone needed to implore you: please do not to forget to pray fervently for Divine wisdom:

    But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. Jams 1:5

    I have prayed for your family as well, sir.

  202. Some Guy says:

    Thanks, Elspeth.

    This is one verse that tends to come to my mind more often than the whip verses: “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”

  203. Cane Caldo says:

    I trust everyone is paying attention.

    @Some Guy

    This is one verse that tends to come to my mind more often than the whip verses: “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”

    Then you are blessed.

  204. Some guy,

    given what you have shared with us, I don’t know if your wife is there for you the way she should be, but I can tell you that we here at Dalrock’s are with you. You are blessed. Don’t let her bring you down into the pit.

    Prayers to you sir.

  205. @Deti – most of your advice is good, except for recommending he tell her to “call the cops” and accuse him of abuse. This is an extremely dangerous tactic to take as some states have an “arrest first, ask questions later” policy for DV calls. This means that if a DV call is made, one or both partners will be arrested and the resulting mess left to the courts to sort out. All too often, even if the woman’s the abuser, the presumption will be the man’s “at fault”, he’ll be hit with a “no contact” restraining order and required to find an alternate place to live while still making payments to maintain her in the marital home.

    I’m not a lawyer, so if anyone contemplates this course of action, please talk to a lawyer first.

  206. Marty14 says:

    If it weren’t for this blog & it’s commenters I’d never have known my true place and worth as a woman. I’m a hole & just real damn lucky my husband doesn’t kill me. How nice of God to create woman that the dominant, all knowing & divine man might have a place to shove his cock. That we might worship at the altar of that cock is truly divine. My supremely masculine, restrained & masterful husband spares me of beating me to death when I misbehave by saying something that doesn’t glorify his cock or ego, (or is there a difference between the two?) For I am here to receive his sperm & spit forth his reproductions, hallelujah!! Man, husband, master is mighty, powerful, strong, leader who is apparently so fragile & weak minded that any challenge whatsoever (be it to his choice of ice cream for me, or my income surpassing his) to his rightful place at the center of the universe can send his ego into a tailspin of Biblical proportions!
    Until now I thought I was a human being & child of God, and that my relationship with my husband was happy & mutually fulfilling because we’re friends & consult one another about everything. But this blog & it’s commenters have shown me the light!!! I am but an orifice for cock & spunk, meant to breed & make lunch. What a humbling realization. I am now a grateful vagina. May all of God’s divine leaders find a fresh young one to pound til death do you part.

  207. new2redpill says:

    @ Marty,
    Your post is biting but I have no problem admitting it still had me laughing out loud!

    Hopefully you can understand that although some of the men here are extreme (they never met a good woman and such a creature doesn’t exist) others are Godly men who would just like to restore some balance to the marriage relationship. Yes, they are jaded but they didn’t get that way for no reason. Almost all of them have been horribly abused by the women in their life. Given that circumstance, they are going to post from their truth and it’s not gonna be pretty. Sometimes it’s not great to read but I just walk in MY truth which is that I have not committed those sins, nor would I ever do so.

    This place exists to support those men, to help them make sense of what has happened / is happening to them and to help them find some sort of peace. It also helps to educate and advocate for much needed change. Women who come here need to realize the purpose of the website. It has no need to change its character. If it offends you, then there are many, many other websites – you really don’t have to frequent this one.

    The majority of the men here, though they see women with a jaundiced eye, are still good men. I would consider myself fortunate to be in a relationship with most of them.
    It would be difficult at first because they have no trust and will cut a woman no slack, but I believe that if I but do my part, should a man like this come into my life, it is certainly not beyond the abilities of the Lord to straighten things out. If the right woman comes from the right place of love and proper submission, with the help and blessing of God both of them could have a very happy life together. However I am pretty certain beating them up is surely not the answer! That approach is neither godly nor wise, and certainly not kind.

    Just my opinion – but I have peace with it and believe that it is right. You just have to be willing to allow God to speak to you regarding these issues and then go with what He says rather than listen to the social climate and the voices of those around you.

  208. Pingback: Advice to the Single Young Man | The Orthosphere

  209. embracing reality says:

    Marty says: “How nice of God to create woman that the dominant, all knowing & divine man might have a place to shove his cock. ”

    Are you implying that women or wives in majority are raped? If not the good news for you and women like you is that you fully have the right to keep your knees together and stay single, I promise you won’t be missed. As you well know legions of promiscuous young women seem only to eager to have “shoved cock” of at least the upper ranges of men, maybe those guys aren’t too interested in you so much eh? You see, at the end of the day nobody really cares what you think because you don’t count.

    new2redpill says: “Yes, they are jaded but they didn’t get that way for no reason. Almost all of them have been horribly abused by the women in their life.”

    Maybe we should take a poll but I think your assumption here would only be true of roughly half the male players on a site like this in the manosphere. I’ve never been married, have no kids, have dated many woman with mixed results and expect I’m typical. I’ve somewhat enjoyed dating relationships with Christian women but have found them overall to be rather low quality prospects for marriage. Selfish, manipulative, dishonest even promiscuous. Am I jaded, bitter? I’m surrounded by men who have been destroyed in divorce by their ex-wives and the courts and a few married men who complain about their wives aforementioned horrible behavior in addition to sexlessness and obesity. Am I bitter, jaded? I also knew a number of men who died on motorcycles. I can assure you the reason I don’t own a motorcycle is not because I am jaded or bitter at motorcycles.

  210. new2redpill says:

    @embracing reality
    Please note that I never used the word “bitter.” You added that one, which totally changes my statements. I used only the word “jaded.”

    Definition of jaded: “tired, bored, or lacking enthusiasm, typically after having had too much of something.”

    You stated, “I’ve somewhat enjoyed dating relationships with Christian women but have found them overall to be rather low quality prospects for marriage. Selfish, manipulative, dishonest even promiscuous.”

    I dunno – jaded seems to fit what you have stated.

    Furthermore, in the time that I have been here, i have been called a liar several times by those who will not believe that I never rode the carousel and am not promiscuous even now. There is also disbelief that I was a submissive wife and still ended up divorced. I was also called a liar when I said that he divorced me and yet I agreed to, and signed the exact divorce agreement he asked for – including giving up the rights that the law gave me to half his pensions. None of those things fit the general perception of women given here, therefore it can only be that I am lying. Again, jaded – not without reason, but still jaded.

    What became obvious to me some time ago is that if I intend to have a prayer of finding happiness with a member of the opposite sex, I am going to have to learn how to work around jaded and establish some smattering of trust, That’s a pretty tall order given the way women were destroying the church and society in general while I remained in my marriage, oblivious to what single men were enduring.

    I didn’t play the game, but guilt by association makes it so that it really doesn’t matter. I still have to deal with the consequences…

  211. Pingback: A Classic Must Read… | A Man, His Wife, and the Bible

  212. MM says:

    (Repeating a question I asked in another venue)
    I have a question about Red Pill theory that I hope someone has an answer to.

    Many Red Pill thinkers say that *attraction* is involuntary and unconscious. Other persons (not solely Red Pill folk) say that *desire* for sex on the part of women is a decision.

    As regards the latter: one thinks of all the books by women for other women which try to engender a decision to be “sex positive” and to make it their personal penchant to enjoy sex, initiate it, and the like. Also, some people partial to Red Pill ideas have talked about working together with one’s woman to increase desire.

    For many Red Pillers, the attraction issue is the end game and dependent solely on the Alpha/Beta dynamics (even if you are like Athol Kay and want to employ them both). Here, the woman contributes very little. You must retain your attractiveness or you’re doomed.

    So, what is the truth here? Or, what is the reconciliation of the seeming opposites, if there is one.

    This seems to me to be a very basic question with regard to the Red Pill/Married Attraction (LTR) thing that needs an answer.

    I would be very grateful for people’s thoughts about this.

  213. Dalrock says:

    @MM

    Many Red Pill thinkers say that *attraction* is involuntary and unconscious. Other persons (not solely Red Pill folk) say that *desire* for sex on the part of women is a decision.

    As regards the latter: one thinks of all the books by women for other women which try to engender a decision to be “sex positive” and to make it their personal penchant to enjoy sex, initiate it, and the like. Also, some people partial to Red Pill ideas have talked about working together with one’s woman to increase desire.

    Welcome MM.

    Rollo is right when he says “You can’t negotiate desire”. What that means is you can’t bargain your way to being attractive to a woman. She either feels it, or she doesn’t. This doesn’t mean that a wife can’t fulfill her marital vows, but obviously lacking attraction is not ideal (and a loving husband will want to work to help change that as much as possible, just as a loving wife would). I do think the wife can do a fair amount to control her own state of mind, so there is probably something to the “positive attitude” approach. However, this isn’t going to generate passion and excitement.

    For many Red Pillers, the attraction issue is the end game and dependent solely on the Alpha/Beta dynamics (even if you are like Athol Kay and want to employ them both). Here, the woman contributes very little. You must retain your attractiveness or you’re doomed.

    So, what is the truth here? Or, what is the reconciliation of the seeming opposites, if there is one.

    Women are attracted to men who lead them. This can be accomplished two different ways. He can have such tight game that she can’t help but follow, or she can submit so fully that he is leading no matter how ineffective his game. If we are talking to the husband, we are going to coach him on how to more effectively lead. If we are talking to the wife, we are going to focus on submission. As I said in the OP, all either husband and wife can do is their own part which should hopefully make the other’s part a bit easier.

  214. Pingback: Radio Silence and Dread. | Dalrock

  215. Pingback: Slow your roll | Dalrock

  216. MM says:

    I didn’t get around to thanking you for this, so thanks!

  217. FM says:

    How do you develop the really “tight game” you mention above?

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