How big was her dick?

The Chicago Tribune has an article about a woman who stabbed a man on a city bus and then followed him (with her knife) when he got off the bus.  It isn’t clear from the account if she was able to continue stabbing the man during her pursuit, or if she was only able to stab him while he was still on the bus.  However, it does say that her attack left him in critical condition.

After he got off the bus (followed by his attacker), the man managed to wrestle the knife away from his attacker and fatally stab her.  The headline reads:  2 stabbed, 1 fatally, after argument on CTA bus

A female was killed and a man critically injured after the two stabbed each other following an argument that began on a CTA bus on the South Side, Chicago police said.

A commenter at Second City Cop asked:

Who is the victim? 🤔🤔

This is an excellent question, because the Chicago Tribune has gone to torturous lengths to frame the attacker as a victim.  We don’t know if the man she stabbed was a current or former romantic partner, but if he was according to the Duluth model (the model we train our police in) the man who was attacked, fled, and then ultimately fought back would be the aggressor.

Feminist doublethink would have us accept that women have dicks and are so tough that a one armed woman can easily beat up a bar full of men.  It would simultaneously have us see a woman who stabs a man and then chases after him when he tries to get away as a victim and not an aggressor.

Posted in Doublethink, Duluth Model, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists | 227 Comments

Who cares that Misty has a bigger dick than Colleen?

I watched part of the first episode of the new season of Luke Cage the other day.  Misty Knight and Colleen Wing were in the lead up to the obligatory one armed woman beats up a bar full of men scene, and were (as custom requires) verbally establishing their manhood.  Misty establishes that she’s one of the boys via a try hard reference to the bolt pattern and water pump configuration she would have on her fantasy muscle car.  Colleen, knowing that she’s been bested in the women pretending to be men contest, concedes that Misty has a bigger dick than she does.

If you have Netflix, I encourage you to scan through to the beginning of the bar scene just for laughs.  If you do, you will see that the feminist writers are deadly serious in this.  They really think that women talking about how they are like men (including having dicks) makes women like men.

The interesting thing is that we live in a culture where women claiming to have dicks isn’t really noteworthy.  Feminism has been building up to this moment for decades, and the line between dressing Amelia Earhart like Lindbergh and having a man pilot her over the Atlantic and women bragging about the size of their dicks is an easy path to trace.  You could even argue that feminists had no choice in the matter, as this is only congruent with a world where women must be included in our combat forces.  Yet unlike with Earhart, the response is a yawn;  feminists have been hinting at the size of their dicks for quite some time.  This has to be a terrible let down, because a lot of work went into achieving a milestone practically no one will notice.

Meanwhile conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, spend all of their effort trying to figure out why men have suddenly and mysteriously changed, despite women behaving splendidly.  This has to be extremely frustrating for feminists.  Misty and Colleen could both whip out 10 inch phalluses, and while the feminists in the audience would squeal in delight, conservatives would either not notice or ask:

What happened to our men that our women are forced to have such big dicks?

Posted in Envy, Feminist Territory Marking, Traditional Conservatives, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists, Weak men screwing feminism up | 112 Comments

Vashti’s daughters.

3 Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, 2 when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear. 3 Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel— 4 rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the [a]incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God. 5 For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands, 6 as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror.

— 1 Pet 3:1-6 NKJV

Sheila Gregoire’s latest post doubles down on the idea that wives who submit to their husbands are in sin for making their husband/marriage an idol.  Gregoire holds up Vashti in the Book of Ester as a role model for Christian wives:

Just because the king and his nobles thought that encouraging discord among wives was evil does not mean that God thought encouraging discord among wives was evil…

I believe that the rush to demonize Vashti is rooted in an unhealthy view of marriage, where obedience to a husband is seen as the greatest good, and sowing discord among wives as the greatest evil.

No, the greatest evil is substituting something else in the place for God.

Sheila’s guest poster Gary Thomas made a similar case in Wifey Wednesday: When Your Marriage is in Trouble, Do Something!  Thomas argued that wives who feared divorce were in sin, as they were guilty of making an idol of marriage and their husbands:

Let’s apply some simple theology here. Who does the Bible say is your refuge — God, or your husband? Deuteronomy 33:27 provides the answer: “The eternal God is your refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms.”

In whom does your hope lie? Your husband’s continuing affection? First Peter 1:21 says, “Your faith and hope are in God.”

Where will you find your security? You and your husband’s ability to earn a living and your husband’s commitment to stay married to you? Philippians 4:19 answers, “My God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.”

Where will you find supreme acceptance that will never fade or falter for all the days of your life? “As a bridegroom rejoices over his bride,” replies Isaiah 62:5, “so will your God rejoice over you.”

If you’re trying to find your primary refuge in your husband, if you’ve centered your hope on him, if your security depends on his approval, and if you will do almost anything to gain his acceptance, then you’ve just given to a man what rightfully belongs to God alone.

And that means you’ve turned marriage into idol worship.

This is a clever feminist reframe of Scripture, because it makes submission a sin and rebellion a virtue.  As clever as the argument is, it is not valid.  Despite modern Christians wanting to make Abigail or Vashti the role model for Christian wives, Peter tells us in 1 Pet 3 that Christian wives should emulate Sarah.  Sarah is famous for submitting to her husband Abraham’s foolish instruction that she tell the Pharaoh she was Abraham’s sister.  Sarah complied, and but for the direct intervention of God it would have lead to catastrophe (Gen 12:15-20, ESV):

And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male servants, female servants, female donkeys, and camels.

17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram and said, “What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, ‘She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife; take her, and go.” 20 And Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they sent him away with his wife and all that he had.

Abraham did this not once, but twice!  The same basic thing happened earlier in the same chapter:

 And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night and said to him, “Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man’s wife.” Now Abimelech had not approached her. So he said, “Lord, will you kill an innocent people? Did he not himself say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and the innocence of my hands I have done this.” Then God said to him in the dream, “Yes, I know that you have done this in the integrity of your heart, and it was I who kept you from sinning against me. Therefore I did not let you touch her. Now then, return the man’s wife, for he is a prophet, so that he will pray for you, and you shall live. But if you do not return her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.”

Gen 20:10-11 tells us that Abraham told Sarah to do this because he he feared for his own safety (when he should have trusted God):

 10 And Abimelech said to Abraham, “What did you see, that you did this thing?” 11 Abraham said, “I did it because I thought, ‘There is no fear of God at all in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.’

The Apostle Peter is clearly referencing these incidents when he tells Christian wives to submit to their husbands even when doing so is terrifying:

6 as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror.

Moreover, Scripture repeatedly instructs wives to submit to their husbands and view them with fear and reverence.

But the Apostle Peter’s clear instructions are detestable to modern Christians’ feminist sensibilities.  Not only have modern Christians rebelled against Peter and Paul’s instruction, but they have created a new rule which says that instead of submitting to their husbands wives need to set and enforce boundaries.  Setting and enforcing boundaries is incidentally only something that modern Christians believe wives should do to their husbands.  You will never see a modern Christian insisting that husbands set and enforce boundaries for their wives.


See also Cane Caldo’s You Bowed Up When You Should Have Bowed Down for a discussion of the application of submission when a husband instructs his wife to do evil.

H/T Hose_B

Posted in Gary Thomas, Headship, Rebellion, Sheila Gregoire, Submission, Vashti | 134 Comments

What to do when the tingles wane.

In modern Christian theology, the wife’s vagina is God’s messenger.  If a woman isn’t sexually attracted to her husband it is a sign of God’s displeasure in her husband.

Sheila Gregoire has adopted the same modern Christian teaching, and brings in Gary Thomas* to urge wives to listen to the voice of God that resides between their legs.  The title of the post is Wifey Wednesday: When Your Marriage is in Trouble, Do Something!  It closes with:

Initial romantic intensity is unearned; it seems to fall on us out of nowhere. But a solid, lasting marriage has to be built (and sometimes rebuilt) stone by stone. You married a fallen man and that means the time will come when you need to become an active woman to confront the weaknesses you see in yourself and your husband.

As daunting as this might seem, here’s the hope behind it: the current challenges in your marriage may well be God’s vehicle for you to become the strong woman he created you to be. Maybe you grew up with an overly passive view of being a woman. Maybe you’ve always let people run over you and allowed things to happen rather than to rise up and unleash the power that is yours as a woman not only created in the image of God, but filled with His Holy Spirit.

This challenge, as scary and painful as it might be, could be the doorway to new growth, new maturity and a new woman who more closely resembles the character of Jesus Christ.

Gregoire urges her readers to tweet:

The current challenges in your marriage may well be God’s vehicle for you to become the strong woman he created you to be. – Gary Thomas, Loving Him Well

While teaching wives to make an idol of their own vaginas, the post warns women that following the instruction of 1 Pet 3:1-6 would be a sin, as it would make an idol of marriage and their husbands.

God made you, as a woman, to rule in this world, to subdue it, to act according to his image.

*Readers may remember Thomas from this post.

Posted in Attacking headship, Book of Oprah, Disrespecting Respectability, Gary Thomas, Rebellion, Romantic Love, selling divorce, Sheila Gregoire, Threatpoint, Ugly Feminists, Wake-up call, Whispers, Wife worship | 123 Comments

The ugly feminist’s greatest fear.

As I wrote back in 2015, Sheila Gregoire is clearly obsessed with sex and deeply conflicted about it. When it comes to sex she and her readers have one foot on the gas and the other on the brake. You can see this from her books as well as the posts on her blog. There is a great deal of energy on using sex as a weapon, including when, how, and why to deny sex. The other side to this is all of the energy coming from the deep fear that they will overplay this card and as I described in Frigidity and power, lose their power. What if he watches porn, or even Game of Thrones while I’m denying sex? Then my V will lose its power over him! How do I overcome my own frigidity? If I’m frigid, my V has no power!

They’ve turned having sex into a Rube Goldberg contraption. But all of this works because the audience is already there. They already know how to use sex as a weapon, and they already have deep fears that by doing this they risk losing the very power they are trying to wield.

Sheila has a recent post that touches on this deep seated fear;  what if years of manipulation and nagging result in her readers’ husbands no longer desiring them sexually?  The post is a guest post by a sex therapist, and it has clearly struck a nerve.  Click through and check out the comments for a jarring look into the mindframe of the ugly feminist.  Then remember that Sheila’s readers came to this place after deciding that they were wiser than the Bible:

3 Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, 2 when they see your respectful and pure conduct. 3 Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— 4 but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. 5 For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, 6 as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening.

–1 Pet 3 1-6, ESV

Sheila and her readers just knew that the Bible’s instruction to wives was the prescription for a miserable marriage.  What they needed instead was a marriage built on carefully guarded feminist equality.  If they only had equality, they would have a blissful marriage.


Posted in Frigidity, Sheila Gregoire, Ugly Feminists | 207 Comments