Better get out the spackle.

Emmanuel Goldstein expertly traces the cracks in the crumbling narrative in his post A Vindication Of The Writings Of Men over at Return of Kings (language warning).

Behind all these excuses is the determination to see everything but the girls themselves as factors in the demise of dating. Everything else, particularly the men, must be fingered as responsible. Women are not allowed to be human, to have agency. They cannot even be animals, base impulses and all. When it comes time to assign culpability, only men have moral agency.

This entry was posted in Cracks in the narrative, Denial, Feral Females. Bookmark the permalink.

168 Responses to Better get out the spackle.

  1. deti says:

    This is also rampant in the Churchian “man up and marry” drumbeat. Marriage rates are down, the men aren’t marrying. Who’s to blame? Men, of course, because they won’t grow up and they spend all their free time drinking, chasing women, buying toys, and naturally, there’s the ubiquitous objection to video games:

    http://www.familylife.com/articles/topics/life-issues/relationships/men/men-who-wont-grow-up#.UfLrEujD_IU?utm_campaign=mm-20130729&utm_source=CON&utm_medium=email-n&utm_content=Link-Header-Trouble_reading

    It’s always the men’s fault. The church never examines the role unleashed hypergamy plays in the culture rot.

  2. BradA says:

    It is completely immaterial to me, but I am pondering more exactly what a “Christian marriage” means, according to Scriptural standards. I am not as sure as I was in the past as I have begun to question government-controlled marriage, which is not Biblical.

    What does it mean for a man to be married from a Biblical stance? I am not completely sure now.

    (This is going off deti’s comment, not the OP.)

  3. BradA says:

    @deti,

    The article you link has a valid point. Men do need to step up and mentor other men. Though that is very hard in a society that pushes so hard against masculinity. They would probably be more effective focusing on that then just telling men to fix themselves. That is true to a point, as all of us can ultimately only have significant control over ourselves, but context is missing for many.

    I would argue that a lot of the things he decries are simply a result of men weighing the costs and deciding they are not worth it. (Though that may be because I just finished reading the Men on Strike book.)

    The Christian Church is complicit, but is mostly just being influenced by the culture it operates in.

  4. thehumanscorch says:

    I would argue that a lot of the things he decries are simply a result of men weighing the costs and deciding they are not worth it.

    Then please explain how you think it would be worth it, when women are allowed to bring absolutely anything they want to the marriage table, behave any way they want while in the marriage, end it for any reason, and still get full benefits of being a wife given all of the above.

    As a matter of fact, the only other gig I know of where you can get benefits(premiums) without responsibilities(denying coverage) is being a health insurance provider.

  5. deti says:

    BradA, Aug 1, 10:37 am:

    Our society and churchian/Christian culture don’t know what true masculinity is. They aren’t even really telling men to “fix themselves”. What they are telling men is to be there when others want; to marry a Churchian woman when she wants; to rear her children (whether they are his or not) and to provide her what she wants when she wants it. Hence the emphasis from FamilyLife on “man up and quit playing those video games” and “man up and get married already” and “man up and take care of her kids” and “Man up and make lots of money”.

    The Churchian definition of masculinity apparently is a married father or stepfather working at 100% capacity. If you’re not all three of those things, then you’re a failure as a man. I can’t agree with that. No consideration is given to what a man might want from his life, his work, his marriage or his family.

    “I would argue that a lot of the things he decries are simply a result of men weighing the costs and deciding they are not worth it.”

    Of course. But to people like Dennis Rainey at FamilyLife or to the Focus on the Family folks, “men weighing the costs and deciding they are not worth it” is an invalid, copout response. If a man doesn’t want to marry, it’s because there’s something wrong with HIM, not the system or the available women. It’s simply presumed that because women are women, they “want to marry and have daddies for their babies” and they are innately more moral and more relationship oriented. Women have to be raised to be “independent” and “you go grrrrl” and, well, we’ll just wink and nod at the promiscuity and the premarital sex and the adultery and the divorce. So if marriages aren’t happening it is because of the men, not the women, according to FotF and FL.

  6. Casey says:

    @ Deti: re: article link

    Same old schtick really; “Man Up & Marry Those Sluts”………..and of course LOTS of ‘Man Shaming’.

    There isn’t ONE ounce of responsibility for this situation placed at the feet of women. It’s purely men’s fault in the author’s eyes.

    The narrative continues to be about taking ‘responsibility’ for a family, without the requisite ‘authority’ that in reality should accompany that responsibility.

    How many of these ‘man-childs’ were raised in households where Dad was either:
    a) Never present in the first place (single mothers – out of wedlock)
    b) Shown the door by his wife, and told his assistance is NOT needed

    The entire article could be re-written substituting ‘women’ for ‘men’ and ‘she’ for ‘he’ and you would actually have the truth.

  7. thehumanscorch says:

    And let me echo these other comments that I agree with as well…

    Why is there never any responsibility given to the woman for having an out of wedlock child to begin with?
    Or for being promiscuous?
    Or for the failure of her first marriage?

    It’s always assumed that it’s both the man’s fault, and the new man’s responsibility to clean it up. Never because of anything she might have done.

    The Woman-as-Victim meme has been pushed to include Woman-as-Unconditional-Victim-Regardless-of-her-Behavior whilst simultaneously pushing the Woman-as-Equal-Strong-Independent trope. Unbelievable.

  8. deti says:

    “What does it mean for a man to be married from a Biblical stance? I am not completely sure now.”

    I haven’t given this a whole lot of thought but it would seem to me a Biblically married man:

    –Is dominant in his house
    –Is not divorced from a previous wife for any reason other than the previous wife’s adultery
    –Loves his wife sacrificially
    –Insists on his wife’s unconditional respect
    –Is joined to the woman with the permission of her family, specifically her father or some other man having spiritual authority over her

    I am not sure it really requires a ceremony. I am sure it doesn’t require a state license.

  9. deti says:

    The FotF and FL folks are coming close to arguing that men have a duty to marry. I agree with this only to the extent that a man wants to have biblically sanctioned sex.

    But there’s nothing in the Bible that says men must marry a woman (women) and become fathers and work at 100% capacity. Nothing in the Bible requires all men to take on those responsibilities. Not all men will even find a woman to marry. Not all men are capable of working at 100% capacity or of supporting a family. And not all men even want wives or children. And there are some men who just shouldn’t be married.

  10. TMG says:

    The normalization of polygamy, and then paedophilia, will be next on the Progressive agenda, because their prime motivator is What Women Want.

    “Ah, well, some women want to be one of multiple wives, and some women want to have sex with children, so that means it must be ok! Tolerance!!!!”

  11. njartist49 says:

    To restate the modern female’s position: As did Eve, she has chosen the serpent and his commerce before Adam.

  12. Hopeful says:

    “I am not sure it really requires a ceremony.”

    I’ve had this same question brewing in me for some time, so I finally asked a Christian minister. I don’t believe Adam and Eve had a wedding ceremony and yet God joined them together. Legally state-sanctioned marriage only requires a license as many couples do not have wedding ceremonies. In his answer, the minister emphasized making a public commitment before God and witnesses (usually family, friends, and hopefully older couples who have been married for a long time who can provide guidance and counseling should the couple need it). Making this commitment publicly reinforces the commitment and hopefully those older couples who are pillars of the community and have strong marriages can help keep the newly married couple on track by modeling good behavior and counseling the couple should it come to that. It’s harder to back out of a marriage when it’s so public is the idea.

    “The FotF and FL folks are coming close to arguing that men have a duty to marry.”

    Yes. I’m surprised this rhetoric hasn’t been used already.

  13. BradA says:

    @Scorch,

    I am not sure exactly what you are disagreeing with. I noted that the tradeoff is not worth it for many.

    @deti,

    I tend toward the “duty to marry” unless one is given to full devotion to spreading the Gospel, per the arguments of the Apostle Paul. That does not mean I agree with marriage under the current regime however. Focusing only on ourselves is not fulfilling God’s purpose for us on this earth.

    What is easy to do and what should be done are often at great odds, which is the case here. Noting a hugely flawed existing system doesn’t mean we need to “go Galt” if we want to follow our Lord. The latter is more important than anything else, yet few talk about it.

    Though we need to think through some of these issues so we know what to push for in the long run. We need to ultimately find God’s will which will guide us to something that will be comfortable to no one, but ultimately more successful. It will likely take a massive crash of some kind to reach that state however.

    I would note that I am not necessarily aiming all this at you. I am just thinking out loud, something that can be dangerous, especially in red pill areas. We all have our own biases and knee-jerk reactions. We need to recognize those and work for what is right more than just decrying what is wrong. Not easy as I noted before, but the only proper path.

  14. I just have to laugh, so ridiculously funny.

    Women truly do prefer it this way, so let them have it. If society were interested in correcting itself, it would have done something by now. Best enjoy your time now for the future holds nothing but pain.

  15. BradA says:

    @Hopeful,

    > It’s harder to back out of a marriage when it’s so public is the idea.

    That is great in theory, but sorely lacking in practice. Women can freely bail from marriages today. An excuse of some sort or another may not even be necessary. Men can face more ostracism from some places, but even that is weak. We have virtually no ties to any authority in this area.

    Such ties may not help in the modern legal climate, but it would be much better for all involved if Godly older men mentored younger men and discipled them on how to live Godly lives. The same would be true of Godly older women doing the same for younger women.

    How much of the idea of rebelling against all authority has caused the situation we are in? We have sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind it seems.

  16. HRH Prince Frederick of Flange says:

    So there’s this piece, about the career-oriented women having only time for hook-ups, too busy for the rest, and then there’s the HUS and Penn’s “rebuttal” to it which Rollo cites in a comment at ROK, saying most women DON’T like hook-up culture, and hope to have more steady, stable relationships in college whilst getting the professional degree.

    So the test will be: how will all this pan out? Who wins? Or – most likely – could both the NYT and Penn’s apologists be proven right? The hook-up females like A. could be the bellwethers, the ones setting the pattern for everyone, even if they don’t like the deal so much (i.e. having to get snockered first to get up their nerve), while the rest of the women, thinking they have to follow the same pattern, do so as part of the hive/herd mentality – “we don’t like this but it’s the only way we know, or so the trendoids tell us.” Which assumes the thinking is even at that conscious a level.
    And the men will go along to get along, and we will see if the expected ratio of 20 percent of men getting 80 percent of the action holds up.

  17. donalgraeme says:

    Regarding what makes a marriage a marriage…

    For a long time the early Church recognized that two people can just say that they are married, and that was enough. But this practice was eventually dropped because you had occasions where one spouse would later say that they had never been married, and leave. This was effectively divorce, which was prohibited, and so the Church required witnesses for the marriage to be recognized. The reason for the Church’s involvement in “performing” the ceremony was both to satisfy the witness/observer role (and theoretically to act as a neutral observer at that), and also to make sure that the marriage was not illicit (think incest).

  18. Hopeful says:

    @BradA

    Yes, you are correct. Any ties to any form of authority is largely gone, except in small, tight-knit, Christian communities. I agree with you about older men and women training younger men and women.

  19. deti says:

    “Why is there never any responsibility given to the woman for having an out of wedlock child to begin with?
    Or for being promiscuous?
    Or for the failure of her first marriage?”

    I’m convinced there are two things going on. The first is that some of these Churchian writers know what’s going on; but they know they can’t say it publicly. They know there is rampant promiscuity. They know there is single motherhood. They know the quality of single women in and out of the church has precipitously declined. They know that there are some women who are notoriously picky and bitchy.

    They know that many women are directly to blame for this. But they also know that if they say anything about this; they’ll be shouted down, called misogynists and woman haters, and will lose their jobs. They know it will cause meetings at which much wailing and gnashing of teeth will ensue. They know it will cause phone calls and letter-writing campaigns to their supervisors. They know it will cause hemorrhaging of money and members.

    The second is that Churchian writers are proceeding from a narrative full of false assumptions.

    1. Churches across the fruited plain are filled to the brim with young, pretty, nice, not fat, available, and low to no N Christian women. All these young Christian women want to get married and start families just as soon as humanly possible

    2. There are older Christian women who are prodigal daughters, realize the error of their ways, have returned home and have repented of their past sins. These slightly used models are just as good as the new ones and just as eager to get married. The best thing for these older, “slightly used” Christian women is to get them married off as soon as possible, for their own happiness

    3. If these Christian women are having sex it is only because they want relationships and marriage so badly that they are willing to compromise everything for it. It’s either because (1) she wants a baby and marriage (which is only natural); or (2) bad men are tricking and duping her into it (because Good Christian Girls NEVER, EVER willingly have sex before marriage)

    4. Truly masculine men want to marry; because true manhood is always characterized by work, marriage and fatherhood

    But, as is usually the case, reality is different.
    1. Churches across the fruited plain are filled to the brim with all sorts of women; but young, pretty, not fat, available , low-to-no-N and Christian doesn’t even begin to describe them.

    2. Most of the older Christian women are not suitable even for dating, much less marriage.

    3. The Christian/churchian women who are having sex are doing so because they want to; and are having sex with the most attractive men they can find. Their moral training is tossed to the four winds when an alpha pays them any attention. So contrary to what churchian writers and authorities believe, it IS a moral failure, and it should be laid at the feet of the women engaging in it and church authorities for ignoring it and failing to call it out.

    4. Most Christian men raised in the church are hopelessly unattractive. They don’t know what value they have, and don’t know the first thing about attraction or red pill thinking. They will offer commitment to the first halfway decent looking woman who throws any attention their way, making them easy pickings for the older Christian women in the throes of baby rabies and trying out their Christianese.

  20. deti says:

    5. Regarding the young women in church — marriage is often the last thing on their minds. They’re not available. They’re in college; they’re working crushing hours at demanding jobs; they’re volunteering here, there and everywhere; they’re “ministering” at missionary trips or conferences or meetings or altar calls or elsewhere because strong/independent/yougogrrrrl.

    6. And also regarding the young women: There isn’t a man alive anywhere who can meet all their 463 bullet points on their list of what a man has to be for them because God has a man prepared just for me who is perfect for me and I know this because I’m a Daughter of the King and God’s Special Princess. God “knows the thoughts and plans He has for me, plans to prosper me and give me a future” and God “is not a man, that He should lie”. God is perfect and therefore the man He gives me will be exactly perfect for me and I just “need to wait on God’s timing”.

  21. Jay says:

    I am coming to the conclusion that nothing is ever going to change. The marriage rate is falling every year like clockwork. Everyone will have to come to terms with living in a post-marriage world.

    Record Number of Americans Are Unmarried:
    http://www.livescience.com/17462-record-number-americans-unmarried.html

  22. LiveFearless says:

    @BradA “The Christian Church is complicit, but is mostly just being influenced by the culture it operates in.”
    Please open your eyes. The Christian “Church” is CONTROLLED and allowed to be FUNDED by the creators of the culture. It is more than “complicit” — It is among the most effective agencies in pushing the culture drug that you say you are against.

    People that consider themselves members of Churches are the most gullible… the EASIEST to influence through well-planned narrative strategies we have built from here in Hollywood. The sickening belief that the “Christian Church” is simply being influenced has caused the destruction you say you are against. Your belief guarantees the continued security of my career… so keep believing the “Christian Church” has not sold its soul.

  23. maxsnafu says:

    “I’m convinced there are two things going on. The first is that some of these Churchian writers know what’s going on; but they know they can’t say it publicly. They know there is rampant promiscuity. They know there is single motherhood. They know the quality of single women in and out of the church has precipitously declined. They know that there are some women who are notoriously picky and bitchy.

    “They know that many women are directly to blame for this. But they also know that if they say anything about this; they’ll be shouted down, called misogynists and woman haters, and will lose their jobs. They know it will cause meetings at which much wailing and gnashing of teeth will ensue.”

    …amazingly similar to House and Senate Republicans.

  24. deti says:

    7. Regarding many of the older women: most of them come with extras like diseases, children, debt, ex-husbands, and “unresolved issues”, all of which her future nice Christian beta husband will have to clean up/deal with/repair/live with. Most of them are ex carouselers, either by choice or by force. The minute a pretty horsie like TFH shows up to play “Sunday Morning Nightclub”, she’ll take another ride on the carousel.

  25. Anonymous age 71 says:

    What is a biblical marriage? I note some instantly started listing the man’s duties and obligations, instead of answering the question. Hee, hee.

    I live in rural Mexico, and have via much exposure learned that marriage originally had nothing to do with priests and pastors nor government offices. See Genesis 29. The father of the bride after a feast sent the wrong daughter to the marital bed, and voila, she was his wife. No priest; no government official. She went to his bed and they were married, period. Adultery meant death, which was really married.

    There are three types of marriage. The first is the private marriage, which is what Jacob had. The couple with permission of family where needed, simply stated they are married. In Mexico, this type of marriage is called Free Union. The couple can initiate it, but in Jacob’s day one did nothing without family permission. Marriage was the consumation act, period.

    A friend in Mexico told me half the couples she knows are privately married. More later.

    The second type of marriage is via the church. At some point in time, the priests said, “We are God on earth. No one marries without our permission.” So, marriage became something one needed a clergy man to do.

    Even later, the government said, “Hey, there are fees to be gained. We decide who is married and who is divorced.”

    Yet, no couple is more married than a couple which believes they are married. And, no couple is more divorced than a couple which believes it is divorced. Everything else involves control freaks taking over society.

    If you were born and raised in the Anglosphere, you have been suckered into the belief that only by the government can you be married. So, just how well is government marriage working out there?

    So, how did Free Union, or private marriage, become so fully established in Mexico? Around the time of our Civil War, Benito Juarez became president of Mexico. He was somewhat angry with the Catholic Church. His first case as an attorney involved a priest who had permanently maimed an elderly man. Benito was told the priest was immune from any court action, because he was a priest. So, when Benito became president, his first acts included taking away that immunity.

    A quarrel began. In the end, Benito confiscated all church property. And, so it is to this day. Any church building is Federal property and cannot be sold without permission of the government.

    So, the priests said, “Well, we are going to refuse to bury the dead and marry people.’ Benito said, “Great idea. It is now illegal for priests to marry people.” and, so it is yet today.

    Well, as you know the government charges money for services. The poor people simply could not come up with cash. So, it became a cultural norm to simply set up housekeeping, the private marriage of Jacob.

    Ditto for divorce.

    My wife’s aunt and uncle were privately married for over 70 years, and died within 72 hours of each other. And, yes, I have wondered if that old woman caretaker helped things along with a pillow with the aunt. Seriously.

    There is a difference between a private marriage and shacking up. Couples in the US who shack up commonly announce, “We are not married. We are only living together.”

    The Free Union couples in Mexico openly state themselves to be married, and refer to each other as husband and wife. They treat each other as husband and wife, and when they separate it is called divorce. And, the community agrees.

  26. Red says:

    Men not getting married is men’s fault. Old men that is. Our elders failed to setup an environment where young men can securely get marred to fertile women. So they blame the young and the powerless for choose to opt out of the bullshit system they built. Fuck em. May the baby boomers burn in hell for all eternity.

  27. LiveFearless says:

    @maxsnafu Nice try. The problem lives in your choice to avoid finding deeper truth. Your belief that cult leaders and popular politicians operate from the same spiritual realm has been proven false. You’ve chosen to continue to keep your eyes shut in the belief that the fame of the leaders came without the conscious choice to do what you would never agree to do. The answers exist, but you’ve chosen not to find them. Turn your TV on, keep listening to the radio programming you trust and live in the land of the oblivious. Support your politicians and church leaders and hosts since it is much easier to believe that what they say is what they believe.

  28. Anonymous age 71 says:

    Red, good try but no cigar. Men of my generation, except for a very few very powerful men, had no more capacity to change things than you do. But, blaming other men instead of women is normal conduct for men.

  29. LiveFearless says:

    @BradA ” We have sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind it seems.”

    Speak for yourself. “We” did not cause this “whirlwind” … @Deti @Dalrock @Samuel — countless others and I actually create the change you say you wish for. The “whirlwind” finds additional strength in your belief that the “Church” is a victim of peer pressure that just goes the way of the culture. What will you “sow” when you continue to defend the bully that’s paid to destroy you? Its membership contains the audiences that are a Hollywood Producers dream.

  30. lgrobins says:

    Re what is the meaning if a Christian marriage–I’ve been confused over this lately too. It is clear there is no reason at all for secular people to marry. It would be nice to think there is a reason for Christian people to marry, but eh…I’m not seeing much. For one, marriage is a vocation and its something that you have to be called to do not something you check off on life’s to do list. And that is the problem with the church is they force marriage on men like it is something they have to check off or they aren’t Christian. Marriage is HARD, HARD, work. It is not for the faint of heart or for those who don’t truly have a passion for the institution. Generally the common reasons for a Christian marriage are for sex, children, stability. Thing is none of those reasons for marrying are guarantees. Both spouses can deny sex, one spouse can decide after marriage they don’t want kids or anymore kids, etc. In google searching…I have found that the “true” meaning of Christian marriage isn’t for sex, kids, etc., its to glorify God. Well, if that is the case…you don’t need to be married to do that. And that is where the church leads men astray. Tells them their life has no meaning, that they aren’t glorifying God to the fullest extent unless they are marrying and “working at 100% capacity” for God’s special snowflakes–women.

  31. Solomon says:

    Ironic that Anon Age 71’s description of marriages in Mexico

    and the description of biblical marriages pre-dating government

    fit the exact description of what today’s preachers call “shacking up”

  32. J says:

    @Jay, you are right. We are living in a post marriage world, and it will get worse.

    When a man marries, he usually puts aside his personal goals in life to focus on his career and earning money to support his family. But, what does he get anymore for that sacrifice?

    Sex? No, sex is now easily available. But, considering that 1/5 of marriages are “sexless marriages” he may end up actually having less sex than if he stayed single. A man’s best bet for having regular sex throughout his life is a series of steady girlfriends (live in or otherwise) who he can easily (and quickly) dump for a newer model when she becomes older or uninterested in sex.

    Children? The fertility rate of women drops like a rock as the get older. Marrying a woman over 30 is a huge roll of the dice. Maybe she’ll be able to have children, and maybe she won’t. If you want lots of children, forget it. Society is so biased against large families that you’ll have to look high and low to find a woman that will consider having more than two (which isn’t happening anyway if she’s over 30 when you marry). The best bet for having children (few or many) is to have them out of wedlock with several women.

    And, since out of wedlock births, fathering children with multiple women, and living with women are all now 100% socially acceptable, the man has nothing to lose by going this route instead of marrying. He may still end up with the child support payments, but he’ll never end up losing everything in a divorce settlement.

  33. Highwasp says:

    “The minute a pretty horsie like TFH shows up to play “Sunday Morning Nightclub”, she’ll take another ride on the carousel.” A pretty horse… I wonder – does the The Fifth Horseman play drums, own a Harley and have a ‘tattoo too’ –

  34. Anonymous Reader says:

    The most important thing about that article at the NYT discussed at ROK is, indeed, the crumbling of the Special Snowflake Princess myth. A little tiny sliver of the truth about women has leaked out of the androsphere and into the mainstream. I’m sure it will cause a major reaction, but it’s still there. We can expect more of that. Much more, in fact. We are increasingly everywhere. One Joseph of Jackson missionary carrying Game samizdat into a large church will have interesting effects, to pick one example. Just reminding traditional conservatives that no, women are not just “men who can have babies” a few times can have some interesting effects. Quietly encouraging young men to tune out the noise around them and focus on developing first a mission and then the skills to execute the plan will have long term effects.

    Truthful men are showing up in more and more interesting places. It isn’t just in the comments section any more. One way to gauge progress IMO will be to count the number of “Well, of course, but”, “Well, yes, but”, “Well, we all know, but”, quotes from feminists in articles. I do not expect any feminist to ever admit the truth in a bold, upfront manner, but rather in a passive-aggressive “Oh, we always knew this, and we never said that” fashion. But so what? It does not matter that they will try to claim the truth for themselves – the truth will still be out there, and that is what counts.

  35. Solomon says:

    Even if they try to usurp the truth and claim it was always theirs, they will be unable to rebuild the mound, and move closer and closer to the life in mud huts that is their natural state.

  36. lgrobins says:

    Also same thing goes for women..they should not be raised to think that marriage is something you check off. They too have to be really called for it. Its not that women want marriage its just the best description of what they think will provide them with a dominant force in their life, via a man, hand picked by God. I truly believe its not marriage and all the romance they crave, its dominance.

  37. marlon says:

    “I tend toward the “duty to marry” unless one is given to full devotion to spreading the Gospel, per the arguments of the Apostle Paul.”

    No sir; don’t tend toward unscriptural positions.
    There is no duty to marry – period.
    There is one duty: honor God.

    Furthermore, marriage with no-fault divorce is clearly not up to biblical marriage standards.

  38. Anonymous Reader says:

    lgrobins
    Also same thing goes for women..they should not be raised to think that marriage is something you check off.

    Well, maybe a place to start would be making clear the difference between getting married and being married. Seems to me there’s no shortage of women in the West who really like the idea of the former a whole lot more than the latter. Of course, then one can bring up the issue of what it takes to be worthy to marry, starting with letter N…

    In a lot of cases, the conversation will break down into anger, tears, and other emotions at that point.

  39. thehumanscorch says:

    No sir; don’t tend toward unscriptural positions.
    There is no duty to marry – period.
    There is one duty: honor God.

    Exactly.
    Nowhere in the Bible does it give an edict to men to marry.
    It just talks about avoiding fornication by taking a wife, a lot about how you treat your wife once you get one, how almost under no circumstances can you Biblically get rid of her, and avoiding the wrong ones to marry.

    Seems like God doesn’t have too high an opinion of women or marriage either.

  40. gdgm+ says:

    Two quick items:

    – Slight typo at the start of the OP: name is _Emmanuel_, not “Emmanual” as typed.

    [D: Thank you. Fixed.]

    – Another confused article on the New York _Times_ story that ROK referenced (h/t to ‘ballista74’ for mentioning Dr J.R. Bruns in his past posts): Are Women Going On Strike Too?

    When the emotional switch has been turned off for so long, can feelings be magically turned back on at some day long in the future?

  41. Dr. Faust says:

    “If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”

    This applied to your religion.

  42. Dr. Faust says:

    Nowhere in the Bible does it give an edict to men to marry.
    It just talks about avoiding fornication by taking a wife, a lot about how you treat your wife once you get one, how almost under no circumstances can you Biblically get rid of her, and avoiding the wrong ones to marry.

    And let’s not forget the amorphous language, the ambiguous edicts, and the advice to stone your children to death for disobedience or execute someone for working on the sabbath. Those are just as much a part of the bible and can’t be left out if we’re taking a literal approach. And we do believe in the literal word of God, right? Otherwise, we’re satanists who believe that the bible is allegorical.

  43. lgrobins says:

    “In a lot of cases, the conversation will break down into anger, tears, and other emotions at that point.”

    Yes and that is why the church won’t talk about it. The modern church is not a place to deal with anything real..just surface stuff and it better be happy, positive Joel Osteen junk or it doesn’t get talked about. We wouldn’t need therapists and counselors if the church could touch on deep, painful topics.

  44. Bobbye says:

    A man cannot be in control of his ‘castle’ if government exists. This is the big flaw in most ‘red-pill’ thinkers. They, like Cypher, want to enjoy the benefits of Machine City government and yet somehow, also be free. Can’t happen. Anonymous age 71 points it out very well. Biblical example: David married King Saul’s daughter according to cultural norm that existed under the Judges(no government). When Saul and David became ‘enemies’, Saul annulled the marriage, an act that was not permitted if there were no King. Of course when David became king, he demanded his wife back. David, being the government, then went on to do much worse things than merely annulling a marriage. To BradA: a biblical marriage requires as a minimum that the woman be submitted to God, and that the man be submitted to God. That is the minimum starting point. Religion and God are not the same thing! Mostly religion has nothing to do with God, and God has nothing to do with religion, not even what you call Christianity. If you are going to claim red-pill enlightiment, you should at a minimum get out of the Matrix. Jesus Christ is the only real red pill. Follow Jesus, not His followers.

  45. lgrobins says:

    I think why women like “getting married” is cause its a way to show off and broadcast to the world that they must be pretty darn special for a man to make that kind of commitment. But once the rush of showing off subsides, reality hits and she looks for the next rush. Like showing off what a bad-ass she can be when she takes all his money.

  46. Dr. Faust says:

    I think why women like “getting married” is cause its a way to show off and broadcast to the world that they must be pretty darn special for a man to make that kind of commitment. But once the rush of showing off subsides, reality hits and she looks for the next rush. Like showing off what a bad-ass she can be when she takes all his money

    Women don’t know what they want till you shove it in their face and they don’t know why they want it.

  47. sunshinemary says:

    The picture with the RoK article is something to behold:

    I like the idea of fathers being active in raising their children, but not like this. Being active in raising your children doesn’t mean you have to look like you handed in your man card. Eeesh. Sorry, but those men look whipped.

  48. MarcusD says:

    So, I dug up a study, that’s written from a feminist perspective, but still provides insights (e.g. the key to the war room). I posted some excerpts (there’s a lot of math/equations in the study that I won’t bother reproducing). Link:

    http://simulacral-legendarium.blogspot.ca/2013/08/career-or-marriage-or-both.html

  49. If pastors were to actually teach Judeo-Christian marriage – the result would be the largest “back door revival” in world history. Western women would not stand for it.
    Could you imagine a woman wearing a head scarf in the service to show submission ?
    The OT called for the husband to provide food / clothing for his wife and I don’t see that being dismissed in the NT.
    – The woman is utterly obey the husband in all matter except for illegal / immoral and treat him with respect.
    – The man is to give sacrificially.
    There is a gross double standard – pastors & women demand the man to jump through hoops while the women is held unaccountable and untouchable (rooted in worship of Mary).

    The church has seen its fill of skewed pagan lukewarm undisciplined western evangelical teaching – the Messianic Jews / Gentiles will have to present the truth. I suspect – they will be attacked violently by western evangelicals.

  50. HanSolo says:

    @HRH Prince F.

    I think that most women intrinsically want relationships. However, due to the rich/safe environment we’re in their hypergamy is unleashed more and so they want them with guys that are out of their league and don’t want to commit. Also, because of this environment, whatever drive to promiscuity is present in women is unleashed because there are few immediate negative consequences and actually some short-term rewards.

    I think a small % of women actually love being sluts all the time and so they’re in hog heaven right now, slutting it up with exciting badboys and out-of-their-league men.

    These “raunch queens” often tend to be popular and have some influence on other girls, which might result in the other girls having a couple more flings or FWBs than they would on their own.

    Also, the feminists glorify career over relationships (something you can read about in my username link) and so that effectively makes it so that only an out-of-her-league man could get her to commit during her 20’s when she’s focused on career and fun. So, who does she spend time with then? Badboys and out-of-her-league P&Ders.

    Since women want to be part of the herd the feminists and raunch queens do have some impact on how much women are slutting it up.

    And since most men are herd followers in order to get sex then they will try to play along with the new herd demand for casual sex and try but we all know that the bounty of the casual booty is not divied up democratically. Most men would prefer a decent relationship but they have to settle for less than they could have gotten back when mating was assortative.

  51. handbanana says:

    women don’t want responsibility or agency, but they do want all the benefits and rewards of people who do have them.

  52. Red says:

    “Red, good try but no cigar. Men of my generation, except for a very few very powerful men, had no more capacity to change things than you do. But, blaming other men instead of women is normal conduct for men.”

    Blaming a women is the same blaming a child. Women can’t think ahead any better the average 10 year old boy. Of course they’re going to follow the heard and do what’s pleasurable. It was up to to the men to tell their wives to STFU and discipline their daughters. Instead the fathers embraced their daughters infidelities and rebellions and called it normal.

  53. tz2026 says:

    I’ve asked various Catholics about the following:
    A man and woman have been through the pre-Cana classes, or are even PhDs in theology and philosophy and could teach the courses. They are clearly prepared and understand marriage. They arrive at the church and their families are all there.

    But don’t have the state permit (marriage license). Does the priest proceed?

    I ask this in the context of “Gay Marriage” – is is a sacrament? Does God define it? Or does Caesar/Nero/Caligula/Diocletian/Obama? And the reason I would need a state permit for a sacrament is what exactly?

    Marriage is a vocation – not unlike the priesthood or becoming a monk. It is all or nothing.

    But to return to the root of the thread, Dating is dead. And this is bad how? We used to have Courtship. Initial contact between man and woman or family and family, vetting, negotiation, validation, and if all thought it agreeable, marriage.

    AFAIK, in India, and among their culture, marriages are arranged, often the families are the ONLY ones involved and they don’t even meet each other until near the wedding day, and yet they are often happier and have lest angst that whatever it is we are doing. They don’t have the Bible but have the Tao (Lewis description of Natural Law).

  54. Dr. Faust says August 1, 2013 at 2:50 pm
    And let’s not forget the amorphous language, the ambiguous edicts, and the advice to stone your children to death for disobedience or execute someone for working on the sabbath. Those are just as much a part of the bible and can’t be left out if we’re taking a literal approach. And we do believe in the literal word of God, right? Otherwise, we’re satanists who believe that the bible is allegorical.

    Part of “literal word of God” is citing Scripture in it’s appropriate context. Literally speaking, these citations you make applied only to the Children of Israel while they were under a theocracy. For everyone else, these rules didn’t apply. That includes today.

  55. Christian marriage and its attendant issues are soul swallowing discouraging once you realize that yes, YOUR wife, YOUR woman has within her the potential to enjoy a thug rut as much as the next one. We start with the impression that its us men who could enjoy rogering multitudes of babes, that we know we gotta keep that in check, and its on us to do so. Some of us even fail. But when you realize that your own wife, in SSM’s words, grows “weak in the limbs” in the mere presence of a man, recently described by her as 5’10-6’4″ and somewhat muscular as well as socially dominant and powerful, if you allow it to it will create hopelessness.

    When you add the idea of the 10 year old boy mentality (and I would quibble or equivocate that a bit) to whatever degree you choose, even if like me you are not prone to jealousy obsession, it can wear your ass out. So, whats a guy to do?

    1. Follow the advice in the article deti linked which I parsed a few days ago

    or

    2. Get sum game.

    Nice. Because no matter what goes right, its despite you, and no matter what goes wrong, its because of you.

  56. AFAIK, in India, and among their culture, marriages are arranged, often the families are the ONLY ones involved and they don’t even meet each other until near the wedding day,

    Yes, but less and less so as a strong progressive feminist agenda is thriving in India. I visit there with some regularity and had the owner of a company there that I deal with describe his daughters marriage and how the groom was chosen. They couple did meet …a lot….but the families both, including extended family, vetted and voted so to speak, then they all invest in the marriage for its life.

    Contrast that with here how its “my daughter/son is getting married”…..couple years later “how sad, they are getting a divorce, but she is already seeing a really neat guy, his kids from his first wife just love her”

  57. Before anyone considers “Christian marriage” they should toddle of to one of the many forums on the net where women explain away all of the obligations of the wife and pile all of the responsibility upon the husband (while complaining about not being treated equally, like adults). Agency is only good when it suits them the rest of the time husbands are expected to provide God-like leadership but only in the ways that she wants to be led. The lack of any sense of proportion and the complete disregard for the Bible is so astounding that it can be hard to take seriously. Just remember that your future wife will be hearing this very trash from her sisters, AND she will be taking it seriously.

    My nephew is going in for the ride, she’s divorced, egg donor of two, Churchian and he’s on the blue pill express to suckerdom. Pointed him here, apparently he wasn’t convinced. But he will be, he willlllllbeee! (Yoda laugh).

  58. I think that most women intrinsically want relationships. However, due to the rich/safe environment we’re in their hypergamy is unleashed more and so they want them with guys that are out of their league and don’t want to commit.

    At risk of falling into casually saying “women” followed by something….I disagree with the opener. You’d have to add, “until the next one”, and accommodate the hypergamy that you go ahead and mention.

  59. HanSolo says:

    @empath

    Well, I did say “relationships,” didn’t I? lol I think if women could have a hypergamous, monogamous relationship (say a 5 with a 6 or 7…or 8) that they would be quite happy to stay in it forever. I think that the 4 year twitch or however often the feeling (if not the action) arises happens more with guys at her level and when she buys into the EPL stuff or the guy really is a jerk.

    We still see that most college-educated people don’t get divorced and so there is a good portion of women that stay married (some happily, some not). In fact, if you look at the stats, most people who marry will NOT ever get divorced.

    I think that a lot of the stuff we talk about in the sphere applies solidly to about 1/2 the population and the other 1/2 is just going about it’s life, getting married, not divorcing, being happy with bouts of strugggles, and so on.

  60. The problem is like we see in “1984”. The more women pursue career and resume and equality in all things previously pertaining to men (from the bar to the ballpark to the boardroom) the more they are shaped by the exact same things that are shaping men. They are ill-equipped to handle that shaping while maintaining any personal identity or femininity. The become the androgynous drones that Orwell talked about. The work of the exploiting women as workers is nearly complete and as a result the idea of family is being relegated to the dust bin.

    It was alright while it lasted.

  61. The main impression I get from women who say they aren’t ready to get married, whether they’re 18 or 38, is that they’re afraid they’re going to miss something. She’s afraid that she’s going to be walking out to the limo, brushing the rice out of her hair, and that one guy she always regretted breaking things off with in college is gonna be running up to the church with a bouquet of roses, just like in the movies — but five minutes too late. Or she’ll get pregnant with their first child and be painting the nursery when a letter arrives from a company offering her the dream job she always wanted but had given up on.

    I’ve talked before about how I think women go kinda nuts because they have so many choices today that they can’t handle them all. Instead of choosing between a half-dozen eligible bachelors in her small town and settling down there or nearby — or possibly going to the convent or deciding neither of those is for her and becoming a nurse or teacher — she feels like she has a whole world of men to choose from, plus numerous possible careers, places to live, adventures to have, and so on.

    It’s too much, and in many cases she just freezes up and chooses nothing, bumbling along in relationships that never seem quite right, working at a job that she’d realize is boring and going nowhere if it didn’t provide her with a social circle, and eventually taking care of a couple kids who happened along. She never openly chooses anything as straightforward as accepting a marriage proposal, because that would close off thousands of tantalizing potential futures that she can’t stand to lose; but life has a way of moving on and making choices for you anyway, and some day she’s 38 and still writing in her dating profile that she’s “not sure” whether she’s ready to settle down. She still recoils from the idea that she’d miss something if she went ahead and “settled down.”

    The women I know who did marry young and seem content are of a type: they were/are attractive and feminine and staying that way; they came from traditional homes where mom stayed home and raised the kids and taught them that was a good thing; they attend a traditional church that backs that up; they didn’t go away to college (though they might have taken some community college classes while living at home); and they tend to come from big families where I doubt they got much Special Snowflake treatment of the sort that fathers tend to give daughters when they have only a couple kids or no sons. So they were raised to appreciate marriage and family, and prevented as much as possible from getting infected with society’s Girls Rule! stuff.

    If a girl isn’t raised that way, or if she’s sent off for a few years of college indoctrination, it seems very unlikely that she’ll be able to avoid falling into the “I have so many options I can’t bear to choose” trap.

  62. HanSolo says:

    @Cail

    It is a good point about the paralysis of endless possibilities and not wanting to miss out.

  63. @Hansolo

    I think that with the EPL, Go Grrrl culture combining with the Personal Jesus movement in the Church that a man would have to look like a young Robert Redford, with a physique like Vin Diesel in his prime, a bank account like Bill Gates and perfect game in order to keep run of the mill Sally interested for any amount of time. The way things are going 5 minutes after you are stupid enough to put a ring on it she resets her standard and you will be below it. Unhappiness has nothing to do with actual on the ground conditions and everything to do with attitude. Culture is priming women to be unhappy with perfection. It’s a form of greed, a little more still won’t be enough no matter how much you have. It’s eating a hole through the young ladies.

  64. Michael says:

    I’m not surprised the spotlight of blame still focuses on men. It rarely focuses on women. I swear this is some kind of unintentional coverup by the mass media. Women are able reap power and benefits from the “traditional” double standard; yet at the same time since they are equal to men. So they are required to do nothing in return.

    MY EX GIRLFRIEND (from a very long time ago, the first girl I was ever in love with) married some guy with money, maxed him out, buying houses, timeshares, new cars, new clothes, vacations, traveling, memberships all the PERKS of everything then divorces him. She took half his money AND from what I heard the judge ordered him to pay her debts and alimony.

    Now in a fair gender equal market she would have now been relegated to a LOW standard of living working as a dime a dozen Realtor loser in a small town struggling to make perhaps $24-30k per year following her divorce. Instead what happens? Her father buys her a BAR. Now shes got the divorce money, her Daddy buys her a bar and then.. ONE MONTH into owning the bar ANOTHER man comes along (yet another sex partner/LTR) with a big wallet. They move into his big house and he funds ANOTHER business venture for her.

    She gets two big clients. Now she has TWO profitable business and is a respected member of the local business community. Now she gets press in the local papers with her name being declared a “self made” women. So she gets to be a “successful business owner”. Her is the part that really irritated me – she gets FREE SHOWROOM/OFFICE SPACE under some county program because she is a “women owned business”.

    ABSOLUTELY Outrageous!

    Sure. I’m successful too. But I CAN’T use my gender to get ahead. It took me years of self taught trail and error hard work slugging it out in the dog-eat-dog real world. I had to live hand to mouth in a studio apartment sleeping on an air mattress for YEARS after quitting my job just to slowly build up a client base to have ONE business. Let alone two. So while I was struggling working 60-90 hour weeks and trying to get clients – she was living it up in a brand new huge house and traveling at will.

    My parents are heaven sent. And I am beyond blessed. But they NEVER gave me any money to start my own business like her Daddy did because they believed that doing it yourself builds character. I had allot of debt from college and law school. I begged and pleaded but they refused. They were nervous about me going on my own. They considered traditional employment as a “company man” climbing this ladder etc secure because that’s who things used to be. I tried to tell them things had changed. But they are from a different era and would not listen. They wished me luck and said I had to do it on my own.

    So as a man, I was forced to start from square one.

    However this clearly does not apply when you have a banging body, pretty face and nice tight vagina with men to pay your way. Although I would not wish any failure on women like my ex whatsoever – I would be lying if I said it doesn’t extensively irritate me that she is equal or possibly more financially successful than me with a luxury car and a license to sneer – by virtue of having done nothing except have a banging body pretty face and a nice tight vagina (and having a nice Daddy).

    Getting free showroom space as a “women owned business”.

    That’s pure gender equality right there! Let me tell you!

  65. I think we agree Cail, what you described is GREED. A total lack of contentment and a total distrust of God’s provision.

  66. LiveFearless says:

    @BradA you stated to @Deti “The article you link has a valid point. Men do need to step up and mentor other men.”

    1. The article is like the vomit that fills the toilet bowl after a man increases his estrogen by consuming too much beer. In the floating mound of vomit,you’ve found some pretty pastels and found those chunks to be a mixture of pieces from his dinner of Lucky Charms cereal. Because there are intact pastel squares and stars and triangles … You justify it and call it valid cereal instead of vomit in a toilet bowl. There’s still legitimate food in there, and you suggest taking those chunks and feeding them to male friends at the party that came with an empty stomach. Forget about the fact that it is ALL vomit in a TOILET. FL is the toilet bowl. Even when it’s clean, it’s not a place to eat from.

    In case you missed it, @Deti has stepped up and he, @Solomon, @Dalrock and so many others have stepped up and are actively sacrificing time and risking reputation to mentor others.

    Instead of doing as advised, you are pointing out that the vomit has some valid chunks in it. Let go of the most evil. You refer to the Bible which is known best by those have opposite beliefs. The ones you call ‘non-believers’ aren’t called ‘lukewarm’ in the Bible you keep hinting about. Doesn’t your Bible call the “teachers” that have SOME valid points (false teachers) ‘lukewarm’ ?? Those are ‘spewed out’ like ______? Like… Vomit. Vomit is lukewarm. Stop pointing out the ‘valid’ from the FL vomit, and step up, learn, live new habits… Then, maybe you’ll be ready to mentor.

  67. @Michael

    Yes, marriage has always been about giving women social mobility at the expense of men

    Any woman can easily make millions, just by marrying a higher status guy

    The whole point of giving insane amounts of social mobility to women, is to isolate men from other men, so they dont band together & form groups like the MRA & MGTOW

    Nobody is more isolated & vulnerable then a debt loaded married man

    The other important point is, ALL wealth because of womens high social mobility, gets concentrated by women

    Literally women, own most of the wealth in lower, middle class & upper middle class society

    THIS IS WHY, theres no social mobility for men

    All the women control all the wealth …

    Which then goes straight to government, as women are basically useless chattle owned by the government, legalised prostitutes designed to concentrate wealth

    This is why theres institutionalised social mobility for women, women are basically legalised prostitutes owned by the government

    Its this social mobility, thats what makes marriage so dangerous & so useful to government

    Giving huge amounts of social mobility to under-educated, clueless women, deprives millions of men, creating a massive under class of men we see today

  68. Novaseeker says:

    I like the idea of fathers being active in raising their children, but not like this. Being active in raising your children doesn’t mean you have to look like you handed in your man card. Eeesh. Sorry, but those men look whipped.

    Really??

    These to me look like perfectly normal suburban DC dads. I don’t think they look whipped at all.

  69. Anonymous REader says:

    SSM Sorry, but those men look whipped.

    Novaseeker:These to me look like perfectly normal suburban DC dads.

    From what I can tell, both of you are correct.

  70. Ton says:

    If that is typical for DC…. well it explains everything

  71. Novaseeker says:

    I seriously think many people in this part of the internet have vastly odd views on what normal fatherhood looks like.

    All I am going to say on that.

  72. 8oxer says:

    Dear Deti:

    On “Christian marriage,” Deti sea:
    I am not sure it really requires a ceremony. I am sure it doesn’t require a state license.

    I am very happy to see some of you religious bros thinking this way. It’s something I’ve written about (here and elsewhere) before, for years now.

    For playas and cads, it is quite simple. Sex is easy enough to get and no commitment is necessary. For religious brothers, this is frowned upon. The problem erupts when the pressures of the Christian (Muslim, Jew, Mormon, etc.) community put the man in the position of being raked over the divorce court coals.

    The solution: A Christian marriage ceremony whereby there is no state license. This may not wash in some areas (BC is one, where you are considered married after two years of cohabitation) but in those places where it is plausible, I would expect you religious guys to try it out.

    Someone should come up with some free (open source lol) sample ceremonies. A hermetic “self-marriage” ceremony ought to be available too, for those people in places where witnesses will bring legal complications. Say a prayer, commit to one another before each other and before God, as you understand him, and live a long happy life without the meddling of the state. If children are born within this union, and there is a split up, then of course there will be child support. People complain about child support, for good reasons, but I have never seen the financial devastation that divorce brings on men routinely in those cases. There are plenty of men living in abject poverty while princess collects lifetime alimony, his retirement money, etc., because of the divorce courts. The wise man will find a way to avoid the mess.

  73. Marriage was a “sacrament” of the church assemblies for centuries in the majority of religions(as it should).
    It would be interesting to go back to the tradition of the Reading of the Banns.

  74. BradA says:

    @LiveFearless,

    > Please open your eyes. The Christian “Church” is CONTROLLED

    Sorry, but I believe in God much more than that. Many are astray, God will always ultimately have His will. The Church is made up with people and will therefore always have flaws. A perfect church, if it existed, would cease to be so if either you or I joined. Perfection will happen after we are raised in perfection, not on this earth.

    > Speak for yourself. “We” did not cause this “whirlwind”

    Get off you high horse. The “we” is American society and started long before any of us were born. Look at how Daniel prayed. He hadn’t done any of the things he repented of, yet he did so on the part of the people who had. Some of the consequences we will endure will be because of the self-righteous on the “right side” who can only see negatives in everyone else.

    We live in a fallen world and you have to adapt. I am not asking for compromise, but you will not reach perfection on this earth and constantly harping about will just keep you from being a positive influence in the lives of others, our principle purpose in this life after worshiping God.

    I find it utterly ironic that I would be called hard-nosed most places but here. I don’t care, but taking the log out of your own eye before you case around saying exactly what others have wrong is much more effective.

  75. BradA says:

    Regarding the picture, must godly men never do anything that isn’t manly in the eyes of those who would be a new elite? I can’t see myself ever hanging with a group like that, but if I found myself there I wouldn’t really give a hoot what anyone thought.

    Though I do have a really hard time seeing myself in a picture like that, so it is almost certainly completely theoretical at this point. I took my children plenty of places when they were young, but I suppose I was more like a drill sargent than a smiling dad as in the picture. We got our children when they were already 2.75 to 7, so I skipped a lot of that stage. We use a double stroller for a while, so I did plenty of pushing. If that would make some here consider me a whipped puppy, blow it out your ear.

    A true man can do whatever needs to be done. That has been abused to get some to be slaves, but being willing to step in is the sign of a great leader. We have the exact opposite in many Christian and secular leaders today, those who only want to be served. A godly principle remains just that even if some misuse it one way or the other. I don’t buy the extreme “servant leader concept” since Jesus only washed His disciples feet once that we know of, that was not an ongoing practice. But neither do I buy the idea that Jesus was a big boss who manipulated all those around Him. He presented the truth and let things fall where they did. He didn’t sweat it if people didn’t follow, but He did pray for His followers (notably Peter) to not get lost.

    That is who I will always seek to model my life after, whoever likes it or not. (I fall short of it, but I still aim at it.)

  76. Mark says:

    @Deti

    Thank you for the link.I found it a good read.But,I have to agree with you on your statement…..to quote you……

    “I’m convinced there are two things going on. The first is that some of these Churchian writers know what’s going on; but they know they can’t say it publicly. They know there is rampant promiscuity. They know there is single motherhood. They know the quality of single women in and out of the church has precipitously declined. They know that there are some women who are notoriously picky and bitchy.””

    How can they not know this? I found this article to be the equivalent to a Cop writing an article stating that there is no such thing as organized crime!…..Total Nonsense! I see some of the commenters on the article take the same stance as we do.To quote ScareCrow…….

    “”Let’s see here…
    Marriage is a legal contract with the STATE.
    For the last 40-50 years, women’s minds have been getting poisoned with various forms of male-hatred (women now applaud and cheer when men are drugged, tortured and sexually mutilated by their wives – CBS – The Talk)
    Men not wanting to sign a legal contract with the STATE to be in a relationship with somebody who has been indoctrinated to hate them makes said men immature?
    Tell me sir, how do functional retards like yourself even learn how to write?””

    I think “”functional retard”” is the key phrase here!

  77. Mark says:

    @rmax

    “”Literally women, own most of the wealth in lower, middle class & upper middle class society””

    I have heard this several times.The only women that I know that have wealth obtained it via divorce or becoming a widow.I know a lot of women in the corporate world and 95% of them have more debt than assets.The single women that I know who make over 100k/yr own their own homes…..that are falling apart due to lack of upkeep….and when they do have things fixed they get way over charged by contractors because the clusterfucks don’t know a sheet of drywall from a 2×4. The prestige automobiles that they drive are a complete mess.Always dirty,run cheap gas in order to save money etc…and then they take it to the mechanic and he hoses them for unneeded repairs because the fucktards don’t know a u-joint from a catalytic converter.Oh yes!…..credit cards!…..they have a purse full of cc’s and they always have a balance as they never pay off the principal every month and get charged usurious interest rates.The modern woman is nothing but a target for a good financial reaming!

  78. @Brad “> Please open your eyes. The Christian “Church” is CONTROLLED”
    I would suggest apostate.
    For a reference take a look in the OT what happened to Israel when they got off course (They are now just starting to recover). Israel simply reaped what they sowed.

    The Western evangelical church is steeped in paganism, unscriptural gnosticism, and antinomianism. As a result. the “hagios” are not “saints” and far from it heading in the wrong direction.
    They will simply reap what they sowed.
    G_D didn’t spare Israel when they pursued sin and used her enemies to call her back to repentance. He will do the same with Western evangelicals.
    There is literally nothing new – what is happening today in America is a repeat what happened is Israel and other civilizations.

  79. Johnycomelately says:

    The oldest control game in the play book is to back the weaker party in a conflict, thereby ensuring control over the majority and unswerving loyalty from the minority. It’s a method of force multiplication.

    The Romans did it with the Edomites in Israel (heck Herod even became the king, much like Obama today) and every ensuing empire had used population transfers (or as Machiavelli called them, flocks) to secure loyalty and control.

    The establishment is using the same playbook but on a social level, they will never attack women (or immigrants and minorities for that matter) as that would automatically involve ceding control.

    What else is affirmative action and no fault divorce but a transfer policy and establishing privilages.

    There is nothing new under the sun.

  80. Mark says:

    @rmax

    Here is a really good article that a friend of mine at the office sent me last week.I found it a very good read as it seems to make a lot of sense! I am also going to post it over at your blog.

    http://dherbs.com/Blogs/278/265/why-women-are-so-sick.html#.UftxwtJzEqN

  81. LiveFearless says:

    @BradA

    >”Perfection will happen after we are raised in perfection, not on this earth.”
    Correct, but I never mentioned perfection. I stated a simple fact. The famous “Christian Church” leaders referenced in the comments are controlled. They’re not your ally. Dalrock made the time to describe how this works with an example you’ll find familiar. He’s not being negative here, it’s quite positive because it opens your eyes to the truth.

    Was your church involved in “The Love Dare” (a mass market “Christian Church” promoted study program for couples based on “Fireproof” the movie)? https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/how-fireproof-lowers-the-boom/

    >”We live in a fallen world and you have to adapt.”
    Yes, while everyone else was working a normal, stable, secure job I was on the air day and night in smaller media markets so that I could eventually move the “Hollywood” and produce stuff that influences the whole world from the place the Christian Church used to call ‘evil’ (now the larger Christian Churches are accepting Bible study materials from the studios a few blocks from here)

    >”constantly harping about will just keep you from being a positive influence in the lives of others”
    Correct. This is why I only harp on those that still speak Christianese while defending those that have kept them from the truth.

  82. @8oxer

    Biblical marriage:

    And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.
    (Gen 24:67)

  83. @BradA

    Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
    (Mat 5:48)

    And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
    (Rom 12:2)

    and especially:

    I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing. Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.
    (Php 3:14-17)

  84. LiveFearless says:

    @BradA
    >”being a positive influence in the lives of others, our principle purpose in this life after worshiping God”
    You’re correct, and it sounds like you’ve been the positive influence for your children… a great Man and Dad to children that would not have had this combination without you.

    I sense that you’ve been the type of leader in their lives that so few have had. They’ve had you while the majority of children in the ‘Church’ have had leaders that did not teach what you’ve taught your children. My words are here to encourage you examine the true motives of some ‘leaders’ that otherwise seem respected.

    We can all learn from your stories of adopting and rearing children. This blog may or may not be the space for such content, but such a space should exist. Global influencers have a few traits in common. One of them is being reared by those that faced fears and did what seemed impossible. It sounds like you’ve done both for a long time.

  85. Eliezer Ben Yehuda says:

    >>> so I finally asked a [ordained clergyman]”

    Your first mistake. They have a conflict of interest.

  86. I seriously think many people in this part of the internet have vastly odd views on what normal fatherhood looks like.

    All I am going to say on that.

    But there is a lot to say on this, and I am in agreement with you. That some guys lined up with their stroller age kids for a photo means some guys lined up with their stroller age kids for a photo.

    I think I know the image SSM was getting at, but this one is not it. If it is, yes, there is an unusual bent on fatherhood. We have all seen the sunken chested pale fellow carrying one kid in a papoose and pushing another through the grocery, standing with a list and hos phone to his ear with the wife managing his purchases. Its not that they guy is buying groceries, its a certain image cast by more and more men as they go about these domestic routines.

    But lining up for a photo with your kids? If thats a problem for folks in the manosphere, God help us all because that’s a symptom that the people are no longer running game, game is running people.

  87. Ton says:

    I respect your intellect and writing a good deal Novaseeker, but look at those men, their soft faces & weak eyes

    Are those the men you want with you when the shit hits the fan and dialing 911 isn’t an option? Fighting a fire? On the deck of crab boat when shit goes bad? Or in South East Anacostia during the crack explosion? The LA riots? In the woods being hunted down by a grizzly bear with a bad attitude?

    I’m not saying every man should be a recruiting story for Delta Force, but every man should be visibly strong, determined and purposeful ( which is the best way to ensure you never have to fight )

  88. Ton says:

    It’s not the photo or the kids, It’s the men in the photo, and the setting. And the strollers. Cary your kid or have him walk or some combination of the two.

  89. @SSM

    “I like the idea of fathers being active in raising their children, but not like this. Being active in raising your children doesn’t mean you have to look like you handed in your man card. Eeesh. Sorry, but those men look whipped.”

    Yea, those men are whipped …

    They’re doing whats known as mirroring

    They’re mirroring the kids, as they’ve got no social life, or male influence, so they start mirroring the kids … look up mirror neurons …

    In fact you could call these guys, mirroring neurons lol

    Check out their clothes, the way they dress, their posture etc., it all comes from not having a social life & being around kids all the time …

    Stayathome dads are idiots, get some relatives & family to help out with the kids, sitting home around a kid all day, is retarded

    Also prolonged contact with children releases tons of oxcytocin & oestrogen … leading to huge health risks for men … so yea these guys look pussy whipped

    Stayathome dads arent the answer, get friends or family to help look after them, solo raising kids are dangerous to a mans health

    If guys decide to go surrogate, avoid solo raising them at all costs, get friends, relatives etc., to help out

    Or risk looking like this bunch of pussy whipped loosers …

    SSM linked …

  90. @Ton

    “It’s not the photo or the kids, It’s the men in the photo, and the setting. And the strollers. Cary your kid or have him walk or some combination of the two.”

    Great point about the stroller, yea men shouldnt be anywhere near a stroller

    Strollers are for women, & their fat asses …

    Who the hell uses strollers, none of the fathers I know own a stroller lol … its always the fat assed women rolling their kids around, like a common garden wheelbarrow

    Seriously how much effort is it to hold a childs hand & discipline him?

    Instead of strapped down in a straitjacket on wheels … thats all a stroller really is, a basic straitjacket on wheels, for women who cant discipline their kids

  91. @Empath & novaseeker

    You really dont get it…

    Those men arent raising kids

    The kids are raising them …

  92. @Mark

    “Here is a really good article that a friend of mine at the office sent me last week.I found it a very good read as it seems to make a lot of sense! I am also going to post it over at your blog.

    http://dherbs.com/Blogs/278/265/why-women-are-so-sick.html#.UftxwtJzEqN

    Btw that link doesnt work lol

    But yea, post it on my blog & i’ll even reblog it for you

  93. LiveFearless says:

    Those humans in the group photo that have the appearance of being male were likely extras on a movie set. Whatever the movie, it likely bombed because even the normal “chick flick” audience couldn’t handle that much beta in one scene.

  94. Ton says:

    There is one guy in that photo who looks fit and might possibly have some masculine pride and strength left in him. We don’t see a stroller in front of him, his shoulders aren’t drooping, he isn’t smiling, his kid is in his arms and he’s as physically separated from the other men as he can be and still be in the photo.

  95. @Ton

    The guy carrying the baby’s wearing a flannel male maternal shirt …

  96. greyghostto says:

    too many think being a substitute mom is dad involvement. When I was out with my daughter we went to the Confederate Airforce Museum in Lancaster and sat up in the cockpit of a B-25. Walking around in a mall is mommie stuff. Currently working on setting up to night hog hunt for the first time. Will take the oldest kid out second time to the field. Kids like for a dad to be a dad not mommy light or dork dad.

  97. alcestiseshtemoa says:

    I thought that the photography on ROK showing all of the fathers with their own children was kind of cute.

  98. Emmanuel Goldstein says:

    Prince Frederick, as dalrock himself has said (IIRC), the age at marriage is all that matters. If they’re getting married at 28 or 30, you can be sure they’ve had several boyfriends and probably some flings as well. There were some articles about how the average NYC career woman has a notch count of 20 or 30+. And as I said in my article, it’s really no big deal for her to find a husband if she wants one.

    As for the men pictured, well, I’ll refrain from cursing here. Milksops. Gynecomastia, androgynous attire, surely soft nerdy voices. And they weren’t DC dads, but from a place in America where men are thought tl be manly. Was a stay at home dads group.

  99. Titanium says:

    Cail @5:06p

    I think you’ve nailed it.

    You’ve just described the Paradox of Choice which is a book by Barry Schwartz. He frames it in terms of consumer goods but it applies in this context as well.

  100. James K says:

    @Bobbye

    A man cannot be in control of his ‘castle’ if government exists.

    And a man cannot be in control of his castle if government does not exist, either. Life without government would be an endless struggle of everyone against everyone else. If people of goodwill band together to fight robbers and bandits, that grouping becomes … government.

    A man’s best chance of being in control of his castle is a small government that has respect for individual liberty.

    @gdgm+

    Are Women Going on Strike Too? (Psychology Today article)

    (in short, because they have switched off their feelings and been de-souled)

    The truth is that neither sex is really “going on strike”: for different reasons, modern marriage is no longer an attractive option for either sex.

    This is a natural consequence of the feminist advice that women should “fuck like a man” – by which of course they meant fucking like the alpha cads that they themselves chose to fuck.

    @Red

    Blaming a women is the same blaming a child. Women can’t think ahead any better the average 10 year old boy.

    Unfortunately this (possibly pretended) deficit is sometimes combined with the manipulative skill of Machiavelli, and the self-regard and dishonesty of a mobster.

    We do need to hold women to account. Either that, or go back to a world where women are forbidden to own property, take on debt, enter into a contract etc.

  101. Churches in America send their young women on “missionary trips” to third world countries, at the height of their attractiveness and their fertility. On these trips, they do some sort of symbolic and nominal “volunteer work” for third worlders while “preaching the Gospel” to people glad to mouth whatever is likely to get some charity.

  102. James K says:

    @I Art Laughing

    The work of the exploiting women as workers is nearly complete and as a result the idea of family is being relegated to the dust bin.

    It is a Faustian bargain. The birth rate falls, and so we import people from other countries to make up the difference. The UMC don’t care about the consequences, as long as they have exclusive suburbs or gated compounds to live in.

  103. Hey Dalrock, long time reader, first time poster.

    I think the way to fix this issue is not focusing on women and what they have done in their 20s (per se) so much as we need to fix divorce law. If your narrative last year is correct (and I’m guessing it is) then men shouldn’t really marry until no-fault-divorce laws are changed and (possibly) eliminated. Or if we aren’t able to do that (we need to keep no-fault) and we continue to allow people to divorce for no reason, that is okay but the party that wants out gets NO alimony and NO shared assets. If we can’t do either of those things then… if you are man, don’t get married. Marriage is entirely a bad deal for you. You want children, stay single, keep all your assets, and adopt.

    We are looking for some security here but both sides want security at the expense of the other. Its unfortunate that young hard-working, beta men (in their 20s) miss out on “all the fun” the women in their 20s are having sleeping with the most attractive males they can get, never batting an eye at the betas. But these women in their 20s aren’t going to marry the bad-boy alphas either so (in the end) the beta males WILL WIN. (Just later.) You’ll get her later in marriage, you win. But you only win if the marriage protects the male at least as much as it protects the female. This is not the case with the laws written the way they are. They laws should be simplified such that a man who’s wife is divorcing him can go to court (without an attorney, therefore no legal expense for him) quote a simple law, something along the lines of “…I don’t want the divorce, she does, I can’t stop her if she wants to sleep with another man, but she gets no money from me and I keep the house…” and the judge bangs his gavel, the end. It needs to be that simplified.

  104. @Mark

    “The modern woman is nothing but a target for a good financial reaming!”

    This is WHY they give social mobility to women … to take away social mobility from men, as women end up controlling all the wealth through marrying up, ie richer men & climbing the social ladder

  105. @rmaxgenactivepua
    Awesome article.
    This is a really insightful article and worth reading. It is too bad that western civilization is a bit to cerebel/analytical to connect the spiritual & physical dots.

    http://dherbs.com/Blogs/278/265/why-women-are-so-sick.html#.UftxwtJzEqN”

  106. Michael says:

    @ Mark and rmaxgenactivepua

    Now that you mention it it seems like 95% of women I’ve met with the ability not to work and survive on money obtained it with divorce or inheritance ! ! !

    I have yet to meet a women – in my entire life – that says something like “I started a business out of my college dorm which was purchased by XYZ 20 years later”.

    One man started a data imaging software company in college. now he’s 55 and Employs 40 people. Another man sold an industrial equipment repair shop. Another man leases a football field sized distribution warehouse and sells auto parts online.

    But the women? All of them where I grew up divorced or inherited money. And here in CA one lives in the penthouse of this building. She old alone divorced with all this plastic surgery. She looks like a busted up looking Joan Rivers except with shrunken cheeks huge fish lips and wrinkles. The other one is also a divorced spinster. She is obsessed with her dog and expects everyone to pet it. Both sit around all day. The older one with the busted up plastic surgury face (in the penthouse) comes onto every single single man in the building. Including the Janitor!

    If women are so equal strong independent and educated – why can’t they spend 20 years building a distribution warehouse?

  107. Aszher says:

    Those kids arentraising those men – they’re razing tthem.

  108. @Michael

    What happens to all the men, deprived of cash stolen by wives through marriage?

    Those men dont get the opportunity to build a distribution warehouse …

    Marriage is designed to concentrate wealth over a number of generations, into the hands of a few

    As marriage concentrates wealth, & transfers it to government, after a period of time, the vast majority of family’s are broke & the only people with wealth, is the government & women, transferring cash back & forth to each other …

    This is WHY women have alimony & no friv divorce, & welfare & men dont

    Alimony & no frivolous divorce is basically women transferring cash to government & back to each other

    While both, steal huge amounts of cash & REAL hard assets, such as house & construction, from men, while giving men worthless pieces of paper

    Women are basically legalised prostitutes of government

  109. BradA says:

    @Michael Singer,

    That quote was from the one referenced, not my words.

    @Live Fearless,

    I wish I could say I had a positive influence in my childrens’ lives but I am not so certain now. We decided to go the adoption route, taking on a sibling group of 4 after several years of nothing restraining giving birth (and one miscarriage). I had moral qualms with fertility stuff, but I suspect I would have pushed past at least some of those had I known the outcome of our path.

    All left home at 17. I have been falsely accused of many things, had CPS enter in (and fortunately quickly leave) and had them all basically reject me as their father for the birthfather, who screwed up enough to lose his children.

    I went from being a “great dad” to being “scum” pretty quickly in the eyes of many. Had to change churches many times as the children (as teens) poisoned the well. I am still trying to figure out what is an appropriate church as I can’t quite mesh with many. (I have strong and specific theological views, which already reduce the choices.)

    I had been into places that pushed The Love Dare back whenever. I even bought the movie dvd as I am all for getting good resources. I never did watch it though nor get past the first chapter in the book, which I think I had started to look at. (It has been a while.) My wife watched the dvd recently and liked it, though I pointed out it many flaws based on Dalrock’s review and she had to agree, though she is only slowly coming down this path.

    I note my story above to give context that we have to make a choice to not let anger consume you. Modern society really does suck and I don’t see much hope in the near future. Of course God has plenty of hope, but I see that as more disconnected as He often lets mankind go after their own ways for quite a while, leading to very bad things.

    My own future doesn’t look so hot (after retirement, if that happens, and such) as I likely will not have any family to support me when I am old. So yeah, I was “burned by the system” in many ways, but all I can do is try to figure out how to make going forward better.

    Fortunately, I am bullheaded and independent enough that I will keep making my own way in life, whatever it dishes out to me. I may ultimately fail spectacularly, but I would rather strive aiming at what is true than fail by never trying.

    I will play a role in their lives if they ever decide they really want me as a father. I am their father – I was the one who raised them and help them accomplish all they have in spite of their birth/background, but I am not going to beg to be in that role. That means I am effectively alienated from them (2 completely, 1 who is going through his on struggle now with his wife separating, and 1 that sees my wife on occasion but is still distant).

    Sorry for TMI for those who don’t care.

    @I Art Laughing,

    So you are perfect? You are clearly taking those Scriptures out of the context. No need for

    1Jo 1:9 NKJV – If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

    if you are already perfect.

    @rmax,

    Part of that is because modern men have so few children. You can carry 1 or 2 for quite a while (when needed). Try doing that when you have 4 at an age where at least 3 may need some help.

  110. Deti,

    I agree with your first point about the writers and Pastors in churchs knowing the truth but they can’t say anything because to do so would cost them their jobs and earning power. They are in a conflict of interest. I’d say you did a very good job describing it.

    As far as your second points go, I have to quibble…

    “….The second is that Churchian writers are proceeding from a narrative full of false assumptions.

    1. Churches across the fruited plain are filled to the brim with young, pretty, nice, not fat, available, and low to no N Christian women. All these young Christian women want to get married and start families just as soon as humanly possible…”

    No, more like…

    1. Churches across the fruited plain are filled to the brim with available Christian women. Everything else you had to say (every adjective) is irrelevant as Christian men should just settle for what is there and shut up about everything else. You are the man. You have to be MORE man than she is WOMAN. This is a man’s world. You were born lucky, she wasn’t, so shut the hell up. After all, would you ever want your daughters to be judged in this manner the way you are judging these women?

    “…2. There are older Christian women who are prodigal daughters, realize the error of their ways, have returned home and have repented of their past sins. These slightly used models are just as good as the new ones and just as eager to get married. The best thing for these older, “slightly used” Christian women is to get them married off as soon as possible, for their own happiness…”

    No, more like…

    2. There are older Christian women who has babies out of wedlock. So OF COURSE they came back to the Church, they had no choice. They do not want to raise their sons or daughters alone without a man’s earning power. We can’t criticize their behavior (shame them) in church because IT DOES NO GOOD NOW. It’s over. They’ve already screwed up their life so they need a man to step in, marry them, and make them whole. Any man who does this is MORE of a man than one who is holding out for a woman who is “pure.”

    I don’t quibble with 3. But 4?

    “…4. Truly masculine men want to marry; because true manhood is always characterized by work, marriage and fatherhood”

    No, more like…

    4. Look we know that men aren’t going to want to marry these women in this church. TOO BAD. These girls are screwed and their children are victims of their mom’s (and baby daddy’s) indescretions. The children should be blameless. (They weren’t asked to be born as b@st@rds.) But they are. They are now 5 times more likely to become convicts. More than anything, they need a Christian step-father to step in and make them whole. Forget about the single moms, this is abotu the kids. So do the right things guys and marry them.

  111. Ton says:

    Does adopting workout for anyone? The folks I know who have don’t recommend
    It

    Max, I was referring to the guy on the far right, khakis, blue shirt/ white collar, clothes fit, left leg forward, about a foot or more between him and the group

    The rest…..

  112. James K says:

    Other astonishingly accurate remarks from the RoK article:

    In tossing aside man, her former master, she appoints the corporation as her new overlord. As Roissy wrote, woman cannot content herself with freedom – she simply elects another master to dominate her.

    Cf. Diana Schaub and Kenneth Minogue’s take on the Betty Friedan generation’s “unspoken dissatisfaction”: their inability to cope with their leisure.

    http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/courses01/rrtw/Minogue.htm

    Rather than sign up for the inevitable breakups that her careerism ensures, she ditches them altogether. The boyfriend was just a convenient fabrication to make her feel less slutty for pre-marital sex anyway. And now even that has proven too onerous.

    With time, the link between whoredom and female careerism becomes evident, as pragmatic concerns whittle away at meaningful monogamy. And since practically no one is willing to renounce careerism’s status as commendable for women, nothing will change.

    As real wages shrink until two incomes are necessary to set up home and raise kids, careerism is not only commendable but mandatory – yet this in turn makes many years of whoredom inevitable, and decreases the chance that a woman will ever settle down with a suitable man.

  113. James,

    “As real wages shrink until two incomes are necessary to set up home and raise kids, careerism is not only commendable but mandatory –”

    Aren’t we already at this point? I think we’ve been here since 1990.

    “…yet this in turn makes many years of whoredom inevitable, and decreases the chance that a woman will ever settle down with a suitable man.”

    Don’t you think it is more and more the case that men want the career girl?

    Look, your average celebate beta male who has been building his life through his 20s has proabably been living alone for at least some of that time. So he has already been his own “homemaker” so to speak. I think it might be a little harder for that beta male (now in his early 30s, who has been working full time AND caring for his own home) to value a woman who isn’t careerism focused.

  114. Anonymous Reader says:

    IMO this is the best comment by far on the ROK article:

    Westley:
    Today’s women are like gay men: promiscuous, flamoyant, bitchy, incapable of intimacy or monogamy, and simultaneously attracted to, yet jealous of and resentful of masculine men. Naturally, they are insufferable to be around.

    And the other side of that are the men one encounters online who write like women, or the men one encounters in real life who seem to be effeminate. All too often they are “traditional conservatives”. And no, I am not confusing politeness & manners with effeminacy. It is very easy to be polite in a masculine manner, not mincing about like someone’s kitchen bitch.

    If a man were to find himself taking care of children full time, he would be well advised to make space in the dwelling for a full weight lifting station. For his physical and mental health, it would be essential, in order to avoid looking like the image SSM, Ton and I have reflected on.

  115. Ton, that was the guy I was referring to

    “The guy carrying the baby’s wearing a flannel male maternal shirt …” lol

  116. Entropy is My God says:

    @Faust,

    You heretic, you pharisee. You come to this blog and accuse all on it of not conforming to the bible as written, some of us do.

    “and let’s not forget the amorphous language, the ambiguous edicts, and the advice to stone your children to death for disobedience or execute someone for working on the sabbath. Those are just as much a part of the bible and can’t be left out if we’re taking a literal approach. And we do believe in the literal word of God, right? Otherwise, we’re satanists who believe that the bible is allegorical.”

    How easily you disassemble and promulgate your twisted version of the bible. Allow me to untangle your twisted web of typed feces.

    Deuteronomy 21:18-21

    King James Version (KJV)

    18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

    19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

    20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

    21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

    So “Faust” (not surprising your name is an invocation of one who sold his soul to Satan), you see that this was in direct reference to a child who is a drunkard and a glutton, and had been warned repeatedly and had to be brought before the elders. Nice try you absolute heretic.

    Your next biblical Pharisee mistake consists in the purely feel good moralist deism misinterpretation of this verse

    Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Exodus 31:15

    If you managed to read the whole bible and not cherry pick verses to support your twisted and satanic message than maybe you would understand that this limitation was erased when Jesus died on the cross and eliminated the sabbath requirement, as he was the final and ultimate sacrifice.

  117. Entropy is My God says:

    @ Faust

    You are over 100% incorrect, your misapplied version of certain verses haphazardly stung together is surely not correct and not appropriate way of readying the bible. There is almost zero chance that you have lead anyone to Christ with your pedantic feminist leavings meant to inspire rebellion and sin.

    Please read the bible more carefully and stop posting until you have more appropriate things to say that do not directly contradict what is written in the bible.

  118. 8oxer says:

    Dear Westley and Anonymous Reader:

    Today’s women are like gay men: promiscuous, flamoyant, bitchy, incapable of intimacy or monogamy, and simultaneously attracted to, yet jealous of and resentful of masculine men. Naturally, they are insufferable to be around.

    Jack Donovan wrote a number of books and articles on this. Donovan is what others would call gay (he describes himself as an androphile, at least partly to distance himself from the dudes who act like women).

    Gay dudes, according to Donovan, are the first playas, the people who initiated the “hook up” culture that PUA types are involved in now. They “did it for the numbers” and ended up emotionally empty, basically adopting feminine traits.

    His book *The Way Of Men* ought to be required reading for dudes interested in masculinity. He wrote a previous book *Androphilia*, targeted at gay dudes, telling them to quit acting like chicks and start taking pride in being men again. Needless to say, he’s a controversial character, but his work largely mirrors your sentiments, quoted above.

    Men who “peacock” are falling into a female role, and making women the pursuers. This is productive in the short term, but comes at a tremendous psychological cost to the PUA who uses that tactic. Men were not wired to “peacock” and “attract”. They were wired to chase and conquer. This is part of what makes them so annoying to men who are authentically in touch with themselves. Women may find it novel and it may attract them, due to the strangeness, but it alienates the man from his brothers for the same reasons.

    Check out his book if you haven’t already. It’s a mind expander, and I’m pretty sure you guys will enjoy it.

    Regards, Boxer

  119. 8oxer says:

    Dear Faust:

    And let’s not forget the amorphous language, the ambiguous edicts, and the advice to stone your children to death for disobedience or execute someone for working on the sabbath. Those are just as much a part of the bible and can’t be left out if we’re taking a literal approach. And we do believe in the literal word of God, right? Otherwise, we’re satanists who believe that the bible is allegorical.

    I assume you’re being rhetorically eristic, but I still don’t understand your point. There are plenty of Christians who see the bible as (partly or wholly) symbolic literature. That doesn’t make them Satanists. Most Satanists (of the LaVey variety) that I am aware of, don’t take the bible as symbolic literature at all. They take the Nietzschean view of Christianity as a religion glorifying weakness. (I personally don’t gravitate to either of these views, but respect different opinions on the matter).

    I am not a Christian, but I can see a lot of value in a code which promotes self-awareness, discipline and idealism. Sure, there’s some nutty stuff in the Bible, but that doesn’t mean you discount the good stuff in there, baby and bathwater style.

    Regards, Boxer

  120. MarcusD says:

    “As real wages shrink until two incomes are necessary to set up home and raise kids, careerism is not only commendable but mandatory – yet this in turn makes many years of whoredom inevitable, and decreases the chance that a woman will ever settle down with a suitable man.”

    because women need to work in order to help supplement the man’s income,
    because his wages aren’t sufficient,
    because there was large infusion of people (women) into the labour market,
    because feminists wanted women to be empowered,
    because they didn’t want to rely on men,
    because men made enough money to support them,
    because it was men’s duty.

    Seems like a curse.

    Feminist (99% of the time) don’t tolerate women who decide to think or act differently (e.g. not wanting to work), and now it looks like many women have been forced into it. Coarsened by the labour market against their will.

    I can’t quite put my finger on it, but it reminds me of something…

  121. @Entropy is My God ” eliminated the sabbath requirement, as he was the final and ultimate sacrifice.”
    Chapter & verse please.
    Allow me to point out you are confusing “sabbath” & “sacrificial” requirements of the Torah. No part of the Torah will ever pass away- not a jot or a tittle – it is eternal. Yahshua clearly pointed this out.
    The Torah of Life in Spirit of Christ has been enhanced, amplified, explained, and mostly transcended.

    The sabbath requirement under the new covenant are not done away but have been greatly enhance as the writer in the book of Hebrews 4
    1 Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest is still open, let us take care that none of you should seem to have failed to reach it. For indeed the good news came to us just as to them; but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened. For we who have believed enter that rest, just as G_d has said, “As in my anger I swore, “They shall not enter my rest,’ ” though his works were finished at the foundation of the world. For in one place it speaks about the seventh day as follows, “And G_d rested on the seventh day from all his works.” And again in this place it says, “They shall not enter my rest.” Since therefore it remains open for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, 7again he sets a certain day—”today”—saying through David much later, in the words already quoted, “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.” For if Joshua had given them rest, G_d would not speak later about another day. So then, a sabbath rest still remains for the people of G_d; for those who enter G_d’s rest also cease from their labors as G_d did from his. Let us therefore make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one may fall through such disobedience as theirs.
    ~Shalom

  122. Entropy is My God says:

    @ Michael Singer

    This will be brought forth, allow me some time to expound as this is a long response. However I note that you ignore the other parts of my post quite blatantly.

    I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that you ignore the other parts because you have no scriptural basis for such dissension and pick this part as a minute way to defend the heretical teachings of “Faust”.

  123. Vektor says:

    Men must take power. Individually. The government is against you.

    Doesn’t matter if you are an MRA and fight, or a MGTOW and say fuck you to feminists, or a PUA and decide to develop skills to manipulate women to get what you want. Men need power to balance the power women currently hold.

    Men need to learn to help each other. Other men are not your enemy…..they are your allies and brothers. Help other men any way you can ….period.

  124. @Entropy is My God “pick this part as a minute way to defend the heretical teachings of “Faust”.”

    I’ll be your huckleberry. If you are a proselyte to Judism and/or a Jew who has followed Levitical law then I speculate you would have a better reference point and hence a better reply then the ad hominem (typical goi🙂 )
    Regardless what you wrote is clearly incorrect regarding the sabbath- this cannot be refuted.

    As I side note, if you havent figured it out – I am Jewish and I don’t support the views of Faust (The only western theologian I have found worthwhile was Dietrich Boehnhoeffer).
    If you have scripture to support your premise please do share as iron sharpens iron.
    ~Shalom

  125. Entropy is My God says:

    You say ad hominem then reply that i am the typical goi, pot meet kettle. Since you are Jewish you refute 100% of the new test and therefore focus solely on the torah. Since that is the case you obviously also believe Jesus is not the messiah and therefore we can have absolutely zero common ground.

  126. @Entropy is My God – you obviously missed the tongue in cheek humor as well as my referencing the book of Hebrews since a practicing Jew would not. I am Jewish by blood and disciple of Yahshua. Btw, the original “holy ones” were all Jews until the introduction of Cornelius. Just in case you missed Pauls writing in Rom 9-11 – it is Jewish gig and gentiles are grafted in.
    “Since that is the case you obviously also believe Jesus is not the messiah and therefore we can have absolutely zero common ground.”
    Remember, Paul went to gentiles and Peter went to the Jews.
    ~Shalom

  127. Mark says:

    @Michael Singer

    “”Awesome article.
    This is a really insightful article and worth reading. It is too bad that western civilization is a bit to cerebel/analytical to connect the spiritual & physical dots””

    My sentiments exactly! Like I said in an above post,a friend of mine emailed the article with the “MUST READ” annotation attached.I read it and WOW!….I found it very deep and had to re-read it again.It did “connect” a lot of the dots as you say.I would like Dalrock to read it and comment on it.

  128. Mark says:

    @Michael

    “”95% of women I’ve met with the ability not to work and survive on money obtained it with divorce or inheritance””

    I have seen this also.Apparently from what I have read 86% of women with “money” obtained it via divorcing or becoming a widow.

    “”If women are so equal strong independent and educated – why can’t they spend 20 years building a distribution warehouse?””

    I agree! Remember,62% of government employees in North America are women.This proves to me that women want a “cradle to grave” entitlement job. Women owned and run business’s only contribute 5% to the GDP of both Canada and the USA.There is the odd Martha Stewart but they are VERY rare.

    “”All of them where I grew up divorced or inherited money””

    You just described Femi-Nazi entitlement sister! She divorced a really good guy and made off like a bandit……but,as far as the family inheritance is concerned(and she is VERY concerned)….I control the purse strings as all family assets have been willed to myself by my father and I distribute funds to family as I see fit! What do you think my sister thinks of that?…..L* Luckily,my father sees right through this entitlement bullshit as do I.He and his partners have worked too hard to build their businesses to have some Fem-tard like my sister squander it away!

  129. Mark says:

    @Entropy is My God

    “”Since you are Jewish you refute 100% of the new test and therefore focus solely on the torah. Since that is the case you obviously also believe Jesus is not the messiah and therefore we can have absolutely zero common ground.””

    I am Jewish also.You are correct.Orthodox Jews like myself have been raised to believe that Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi……..not the Messiah.But,we also believe that the Messiah is coming.I myself have read a lot of the New Testament.There are also quite a few of so called “Christian Jews”…as I know a few of them.Most Jews that become Christians do not leave the Synagogue per se…..as they also attend Evangelical churches as well and I have seen this first hand.Most Jews that become “Christian Jews” are looked down upon by other Jews(at least from my perspective).They seem to have to walk a fine line between both congregations that they attend.

  130. @Mark “.Most Jews that become Christians do not leave the Synagogue per se…..hey seem to have to walk a fine line between both congregations “Yep – spot on – it is quite interesting.
    My pastor is spot on/insightful on regarding many OT/NT teachings but misses the importance of keeping the Sabbath holy as well as the evangelical laity vs the scriptural Synagogue format. And the messianic rabbi at the Synagogue I attend is quite confused regarding the resurrection and restoration of Israel on the earth in the age to come. Oy vey !!!
    What is interesting is most western evangelicals really misinterpret the scriptures (I am being kind and have misinterpreted Pauls writing to their own destruction – one is judged/reward in the body on how they behaved and not what they believe). In addition, it is overlooked that John, Paul, and the other apostles frequented/taught in the synagogue, kept sabbath, observed feast days etc…
    The vast majority of the Christian traditions/teachings is unscriptural, gnosticism, as well as flat out paganism (It is simply amazing how far off it is off course, despite the wealth of knowledge and education).
    Shalom my brother ~ May we all meet in Jerusalem !

  131. Mark says:

    @Entropy is My God

    Also…….just for your own knowledge.All Evangelicals and Pentecostals that I have ever met have always treated me very well.It is the Roman Catholics that have always treated myself with distrust and contempt…..and I return the favor! I have a Pastor who is a good friend of mine.How did this happen? 16 years ago I dated an Evangelical Christian woman(I was 32,she was 30) for 6 months. I attended her Church with her(out of respect for her) but,she would never attend my Synagogue(go figure).The Congregation always treated me well but,I knew that I was in the wrong place as I felt like a Black Man attending a Klu Klux Klan party…..L*. Anyhow,she was probably the nicest most respectable women that I have ever dated.When her parents found out I was Jewish her father made the comment to her…”You are dating a Jew?…..I hope he is a rich one”….L*. We dated for about 6 months and she wanted to get serious…..but,only if I became a Christian.I had no intention of doing this so the relationship ended.I still remember when we split up the conversation that she had with her parents concerning myself.They told her…”we really like Mark….we think he is a great guy but,he has not intention of ever becoming a Christian,nor will he ever……money is his God”….L*…..So lets fast forward to the present.She married a Christian man 2 years later…and they have 2 children.I ran into her about a year ago…..and guess what?…she is divorced! Oh well! I gave her my office number and told her to call me as I would like to see her again to catch up on things.She has not called me yet….but,she will.I know that we would never work out romantically but,as I stated above she is a great woman that I respect and want us to remain friends.

  132. Mark says:

    @Michael Singer

    “”In addition, it is overlooked that John, Paul, and the other apostles frequented/taught in the synagogue, kept sabbath, observed feast days etc””

    Correct! I have had this discussion with my Pastor friend………he agrees. It took me to point this out to him in the NT.

    “”The vast majority of the Christian traditions/teachings is unscriptural, gnosticism, as well as flat out paganism””

    Agreed! I could elaborate on this subject at GREAT length but,will not do so here! I used to have these discussions with my ex g/f as well as her family when I was invited over to dinner at her parents house.Her parents we astonished that a Jew like myself knew so much about the NT.In fact,I found them to be quite ill informed about the beliefs that they so vehemently pushed on myself and that they professed so much faith in.

  133. mikesinger says:

    @ Mark “Her parents we astonished that a Jew like myself knew so much about the NT”
    Lol… That is awesome ! A Orthodox Jew testifying to Christians – that makes my day.
    The same G_D of the Law of Moses is the same G_D of Law of Life in the ruach haKodesh in Yashua. Always revealing more of Himself, His ways and His eternal purpose on the massive divine tapestry of the Old & New.
    My prayers is that the Christians will “wake up” and understand the awesomeness of the New Covenant and obey the commandments of Yahshua and the apostles. I really believe when they do show defacto righteous, holiness, and stern obedience to G_D – the veil will be removed and the Jews will see Yahshua “in them” and the two sticks will become one (Ez 37). Till then it is ” precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.”

  134. Eliezer Ben Yehuda says:

    The Christian Gospels do not show Jesus presenting himself as a “rabbi”. The concept didn’t even exist till about 180 AD, when the Roman Legions extinguished the last remnants of Hebrew sovereignty in Judea. Prior to that, just as now, the civil Hebrew authorities exercised sovereign power.

    Mark is not qualified or authorized to speak about what “all” Jews believe.

    there is a large Messianic Jewish movement for anyone (not including myself) who wants to worship Jesus as the Messiah within a Jewish-flavored liturgical environment. Although I personally am skeptical that this fellow Jesus ever even EXISTED, I have no heartburn with their beliefs and their liturgies. I am aware of three officially-affilated Messianic congregations in Israel. The population of Israel is 20% non-Jewish. On any given Sunday, there are more Roman Catholics in the world taking the Mass in Modern Israeli Hebrew than in Latin.

    Emmanuel Goldstein…. the very same guy who publishes tons of Leftist editorials in __2600 Magazine__ ?

  135. Opus says:

    My NY Jewish girlfriend told me, as if it were the most obvious thing in the world, ‘All the Jews believe in Jesus’. This, naturally, came as a great surprise to me but it should not have done so for I often passed that building in Camden occupied by ‘Jews for Jesus’. Even stranger than ‘rooting for Jesus Jews’, I find that most of the Atheists are also big fans of the sandle-wearing one. It seems to me that all the Atheists have done in rejecting both a literal and an allegorical reading of Genesis, is to deduce that God the Father does not exist, but if he does that they just don’t like him. His Son, however, is a different matter: they all believe in Jesus, and get very angry if you have any doubts in the matter. It seems to me that this is largely indistinguishable from the attitude of The Roman Catholics (who seem to regard the OT with some embarrassment). Most Atheists (when they are not being Feminism proselytisers and blank slate Liberals) seem to spend their time knocking religion, usually on the basis of entirely unfair historical revisionism and with the glee of a staunch northern Ireland Protestant attacking the Fenians. They are engaging in turf warfare where they dislike that man’s church, but dress it up with the ad hominem – ‘and what’s more your God doesn’t even exist’ – much as a woman might say, ‘and what’s more you have a small penis’ because she is envious of your manly strength and indifference to her.

  136. rmax
    You really dont get it…

    Those men arent raising kids

    The kids are raising them …

    Bullshit
    I get that the group look like chumps, i get that the picture has a certain feel to it, and I would have been loath to participate in it. But this kind of inference by looking at that photo is posturing, nothing more.

    Some of you seem to have nothing better to do than take every opportunity to burnish your man-cred by juxtaposition. A man would not use a stroller? Uh huh. Gotcha

    I was walking Disney last week, 1000 degrees, full humidity. I don’t have little kids anymore. But when I did, you can be sure I would use a stroller, and take my turn pushing it. It also serves to carry the needed paraphernalia as well as things for your own and your wife’s comfort like water for example. You guys must be more insecure than your persona because while I would not recommend any man be a substitute mom, and I fully recommend a man do primarily with his kids, what men do…teach them to hunt, to fish, to build, to fix electrical and plumbing, and to fix cars, to play a sport, etc….to decry any need to do some task that is a woman’s traditionally is just silly.

    I can spot the difference from a mile between the concave chested wife supplicant wimp, and the man who is doing something that needed to be done when only he was available. I can also spot the guys who would refuse, they generally fall under the category….asshole.

  137. feeriker says:

    Mark said:
    16 years ago I dated an Evangelical Christian woman(I was 32,she was 30) for 6 months. I attended her Church with her(out of respect for her) but,she would never attend my Synagogue(go figure).The Congregation always treated me well but,I knew that I was in the wrong place as I felt like a Black Man attending a Klu Klux Klan party…

    Alas, my friend, it’s clear from this that you were dating a churchian rather than a Christian. One thing that the churchians always, consistently fail to realize during heir Sunday morning socializing is that the term “evangelism” means spreading the Word to unbelievers, something which requires showing Christ’s love to those who are in darkness. It never seems to occur to them that in order to effectively do this, they need to, among other things, welcome unbelievers with open arms rather than treat them as stray turds floating in the punch bowl, contaminants of the body.

    What this tells us is that churchians are fundamentally uninterested in actual evangelism, preferring instead to remain comfortably ensconced in their “AMEN!” echo chamber. Actual evangelism takes patience, prayer, knowledge of the scriptures (riiiiiight), an understanding of people, and effort. Good luck finding any of those qualities amongst the typical churchian franchise customer base.

    So lets fast forward to the present.She married a Christian man 2 years later…and they have 2 children.I ran into her about a year ago…..and guess what?…she is divorced

    An all-too-typical churchian life trajectory. You dodged a big bullet there, friend. Be sure to keep this woman strictly in the “friend zone.”

  138. I’m not saying every man should be a recruiting story for Delta Force, but every man should be visibly strong, determined and purposeful ( which is the best way to ensure you never have to fight )

    Ton, that’s not gonna happen. I agree with the statement, but it lacks utility. Walking in malls with kids as a routine, for men, is pretty pathetic, and the group in this picture looks like half could be the sunken chested supplicants I berate. But it is ridiculous to say that all the men be physically fit to some standard, never use a stroller (this one is a joke, try taking an 18 month old walking for 300 yards), and only tour military aircraft and things like that for father/child activities is over the top. A man should not be choosing to take his daughter to the stores Justice or Claire’s Boutique or his son, heaven forbid, but playgrounds are for kids, despite the presence of the unsavory supplicant men and the over bearing women.

    If a man is to have some influence on his daughter, her friends, her socializing, etc., he necessarily has to expose himself to things of her female choosing. he can practice his masculine influence there. If he cannot do so, he has none to begin with. Its a bit fearful to make parenting choices with the biggest criteria being the avoidance of appearing less masculine. Its also fearful to imagine that a fathers occasional participation in things not dripping testosterone will somehow corrupt his stature

  139. Ton says:

    I toted my son and daughter all over Kinds Dominion, Bush Gardens, Six Flags etc and have a photo of my daughter and me picking wild flowers in Texas on my desk, went dress shopping with her recently, stood in lines at the mall to get Santa photos, etc etc. It’s much less about location and much more about the dynamics of any given situation.

    Don’t have a single photos of me in a stroller with my old man either.

  140. Mark says:

    @Eliezer Ben Yehuda

    “”Mark is not qualified or authorized to speak about what “all” Jews believe.””

    Correct!……..and thank you……..I have never professed to………I am speaking my opinion through experience without trying to be offensive to anyone.If that offends you, I am sorry.I do not mean any disrespect towards you or anyone here.

  141. It’s good to see Messianic Jews not yielding the title of “the Jews” to the Talmudic Jews who would prefer to take over the nomenclature, uncontested. The Jewish people have a proud history and a fair amount can be learned from your history and customs as long as Talmudic Jews are recognized as being outside the Lord’s current covenant and that we are talking to the you, the Messianics.

    I would also bring up the point that the four books of the Gospel are more important to Christians of any stripe than the five books of the Torah. At the same time, let us not forget that the Old Testament was added to the Biblical cannon for our own edification, learning and wisdom. There is much to be gained as far as prophetic inspiration, the psalms, interesting ecclesiastic structure and war history. But the Gospel is where the Law comes to life and where we learn about proper repentance and forgiveness.

    A.J.P.

  142. Ton

    I guess men in wheelchairs are also supplicant wimps.

  143. BradA says:

    @Deti,

    I just can’t see a direct “man up and marry those sluts” message in that article. Could you note the exact phrase that says that. The only implication I can see is the assertion that all older women are sluts and thus telling a man to marry anyone is telling them to marry a slut. I don’t agree with that logic, but that is the only way I can see them making that message.

    I do completely agree with them that going completely your own way is not a godly way. Read the book of Judges sometime. “Every did what was right in their own eyes..” was said indicating it was a bad thing. The long term implications of a society for MGTOW are also quite bad, though the blame does not solely lie at their feet.

    I rarely listen to FotF and FLToday now in spite of listening to them a lot in the past. Part is because my own experience with children did not leave me with a good taste, but part is the other material. My wife listens to them frequently and I can usually pick something out of a snippet I hear walking by to challenge her to think, so I agree the focus is off. Though I still think we need to watch seeing “Man up and marry those sluts” under every rock as it will dull the important messages. Note what is clearly present, not what isn’t. If noting the underlying message is important, note how what is said portrays that. Don’t just insist that it is there.

  144. BradA says:

    @Ton,

    > Don’t have a single photos of me in a stroller with my old man either.

    Were strollers that popular then? Were the places where strollers would be appropriate popular for father-child activities? I don’t know the full answer, but some of the lack of pictures of such could be the lack of stroller use then rather than anything else. When did strollers become popular and common?

  145. Ton says:

    Not sure Brad, but there are photos of me with my mother or aunt in a stroller, so yes they were around in the early 70’s. I’m thinking back to old cartoons, some black and white with strollers, but honestly don’t know. Do know my folks had one, and know my father never used one.

    Emp you know better than that. A medical condition is an entirely different manner.

  146. @Vektor

    “Doesn’t matter if you are an MRA and fight, or a MGTOW and say fuck you to feminists, or a PUA and decide to develop skills to manipulate women to get what you want. Men need power to balance the power women currently hold.

    Men need to learn to help each other. Other men are not your enemy…..they are your allies and brothers. Help other men any way you can ….period.”

    Excellent post, this is what I try to tell people, society is too unbalanced, & men have no idea, how privileged & corrupt our society bends over backwards for women, while damaging millions of men

    It’s this no idea, which makes it so important for men to learn PUA & game & organise as men as MRA’s

    The problem is everything to do with women is veiled in emotional context, covers created by women designed to cover up how they benefit women only

    Its the emotional context women are couched in, which doesnt allow people to see women for what they really are

    Its the emotional context of women, which manipulates the emotional narrative of society, this is what makes women so dangerous to society

    Women use their victimhood to create an emotional narrative which manipulates society on a massive scale, giving them huge amounts of privilege

    This is why they dont achieve anything, every moment spent trying to turn logic into an emotion … instead of rational

    They dont realise, an emotion has no sense of justice, which is why these women commit these atrocities,

    The prey & predation on men is completely wrong, the corruption against men by women is staggering & unjust …

  147. @Brad “the assertion that all older women are sluts ”
    How about any woman at any age who has a n count ? Does that count ? What is the cut off point ? How about 5 since that is the number of husbands the Samaritan had.
    Many “Christian” women have had premarital sex as well as underage sex.
    Judeo – Christian marriage is virgin or abstinence till marriage. And remarriage is only permissible due to widowhood or immoral/illegal behavior.
    Looking just at the age > 30, how many women do you think fit into that category ?
    Allow me to suggest a very small”remnant” – there are very few American Christians who actually make a go at obeying the stern teachings of Yahshua & the disciples.
    My experience has been women want a guy who goes to church on Sunday aka pew warmer.
    There are lots of people who profess to be “Christians” and balk / rebel at any morality/virtue/values at the same time.

  148. BradA says:

    @Ton,

    I was thinking of strollers before the 1970s. The fact that such a date is a long time ago shows that I am clearly aging far more than I think. I have no idea if my mother used a stroller when I was that age in the early 1960s.

    @Micheal Singer,

    Many may have had sex. That would imply many have not. It is not as simple as dumping everyone into a big pot and then calling the entire contents of the pot bad. I seek accuracy more than any point.

    Clearly many who claim the name “Christian” (whether they are or not) are not following the demands of a discipled life.

    My point remains that any message to “man up and marry those sluts” can only be very indirect if it is merely a message of “marriage is God’s best plan for man.” Saying the latter doesn’t imply the former. Any consideration of it is very intellectual for me rather than practical as I will not face that in my life. I would almost certainly stay single if I end up that way again and I am definitely past the age of normal child bearing. I probably could still have children with a younger wife, but I can’t see marrying someone half my age at this point if I somehow no longer had a wife.

    The message of many has flaws, as I regularly notice when I here snippets (can’t stomach listening to them as much now), but we need to speak against what they do say, not what we imply from what they say. The indirection dulls the point.

  149. They Call Me Tom says:

    @Cail, Han Solo… it’s interesting that you both mention hypergamy as a probable culprit in women not getting married, when only a few years ago I remember hearing people suggest that hypergamy is what kept men in their twenties from marrying (at lease those in population centers). I think you right though, for men, sure, you think about what other women you might miss on if you settle. For women, it’s not just what men she might miss on, but what sparklies she might miss out on, even when in truth she’ll never get those sparklies even if she avoids marriage… she thinks she might have a chance and that’s enough for her to ditch something that can actually happen. Just like women can call a decade later and think everyone she ever dated will still be there waiting with marriage proposals.

  150. @Brad “Many may have had sex. That would imply many have not. ”
    I think this may be incorrect. How about this ?
    Many women have had numerous sex partners leaving very very few who had not.
    This seems a bit more accurate (Btw, this is coming from Jewish Christian who remained abstinence till my first wife).

    I do agree with you – many are not “following the demands of a discipled life” ( this is loaded topic by itself).

    I do have to disagree on “marriage is God’s best plan for man” both Yahshua & Paul said it better for a man to remain single. There is nothing wrong with marriage, however, I have yet to hear a pastor teach on 1 Cor 7 in light of remaining single.
    Remarrying a divorced person requires both parties to be forthcoming. In review of many divorces, people are unable to remarry without committing adultery and exposing their new partner to the same- this is rough one.
    Main stream pastors such as Mark Driscoll have grossly perverted the scriptures (substitute divorcee for widow) and attempt to coerce men into marrying divorced women or women with children out of wedlock. This outright lying is done in malice and shaming men while turning a blind eye toward promiscuousness and unscriptural divorce. I would have to guess he simply doesnt want to the church to take on the discipline and care of single mom & kids.

  151. Micha Elyi says:

    I’ve asked various Catholics about the following:
    A man and woman have been through the pre-Cana classes, or are even PhDs in theology and philosophy and could teach the courses. They are clearly prepared and understand marriage. They arrive at the church and their families are all there.

    But don’t have the state permit (marriage license). Does the priest proceed?
    tz2026

    Suppose I said “I’ve asked various drivers about the following…”. But it doesn’t matter. I don’t go by a poll of sloppy drivers. I just look up what the State Vehicle Code says.

    Similarly, tz2026 can simply look up the answer in the Church’s catechism or canon law.

    (The answer is no, the priest does not proceed. St. Paul, you see, taught Christians to respect Caesar’s laws – you can look it up in the Bible.)

    I ask this in the context of “Gay Marriage” – is is a sacrament? Does God define it?

    Answers: So-called “Gay Marriage” is no more a sacrament than any other sort of sham marriage; another example of a sham marriage the Church would not recognize as sacramental if the defect is brought to the attention of the Church and proven is an attempt to marry somebody under coercion. By the way, the reason the Church began insisting that believers be married before a priest was so the Church could be assured that both the bride and groom were marrying of their own free will. (Anything Anonymous age 71 tells you is probably wrong.)

    Does God define what a sacramental marriage is? Yes, certainly. And how has God revealed what a sacramental marriage is? Check out the Gospels; you’ll find Jesus telling those who hold the office of bishop (the Apostles and their successors in apostolic succession) “He that hears you, hears Me.”

  152. Hopeful says:

    “My experience has been women want a guy who goes to church on Sunday aka pew warmer.”

    This bears repeating.

    “My experience has been women want a guy who goes to church on Sunday aka pew warmer.”

    I have a friend who wants this exact thing. I thought what a stupid requirement. What is the point of dressing up and sitting somewhere for 3 hours if it’s not enriching your life?

    Then again, she met a guy who didn’t go to church at all and after many unsuccessful attempts to get him there (unsuccessful meaning she nagged and lectured him about it) they parted ways (I’m thinking he broke things off with her, although she never said that).

    Then she met a guy that went to church 4-5 days a week and she thought that was a red flag.

  153. J says:

    A guy that goes to church 4-5 times a week is likely to actually read the Bible on a regular basis. What the Bible actually says about men–how they should act and what their relationship to women should be–is very different than what is taught in most churches today.

    Or, she may assume he’s a milk-toast wimp (which is the stereotype of a church-going man).

  154. Hopeful says:

    @J

    “A guy that goes to church 4-5 times a week is likely to actually read the Bible on a regular basis. What the Bible actually says about men–how they should act and what their relationship to women should be–is very different than what is taught in most churches today.”

    Well, you’d hope so. I know of men who go to church just to pick up women because that’s where most of them are.

    “Or, she may assume he’s a milk-toast wimp (which is the stereotype of a church-going man).”

    This is probably more accurate. She likes to dominate and then of course resents the guy for being dominated. I’ve tried to convince her that the alphas she wants will not be dominated.

  155. @Hopeful “Then she met a guy that went to church 4-5 days a week and she thought that was a red flag.”

    Sounds like she ran across a guy who was quite serious about G_D. This is a turn off to the vast majority of Christian women.
    Real Christian “Discipleship” is rare and requires a strict lifestyle that is too unattractive to American women. They want to “do what we want to do, wear our own clothes—only let us take your name” (IS 4:1)

    Btw, women don’t quite know what to do with a man who is “disciplined” and desires and places G_D above her. Taking the “glandular urge off the stove” removes all her “power” (ie sexual attraction ) while increasing hers (discipline is a amazing gift). Women have a very hard time keeping their hands/self control around a physically fit man.

  156. Hopeful says:

    @MS

    “Sounds like she ran across a guy who was quite serious about G_D. This is a turn off to the vast majority of Christian women.”

    Yes. She did the usual female thing and told him that she liked him and would like to date him. He said he would have to pray about it. He did not contract her for about 3 weeks. She was in a panic. I tried to reassure her that this was indeed what he was doing and that she should occupy herself with her own interests (or better yet, casually get to know other men socially, enough to be interested in her) until he got back to her. She thought he was being disingenuous.

    He did get back to her and said that he had been praying and seeking counsel from other married couples. He said he hadn’t been on a date in over 10 years (he was mid-30s) and therefore felt that he did not know how to date. I believe he took her at her word. The Bible says nothing about dating, so he was thinking “would I marry this girl?” His answer was apparently no. Not to mention, since she thought he wasn’t being truthful, it’s not like anything he would or could say would make much of a difference anyway.

  157. donalgraeme says:

    @ Hopeful

    It seems to me that the Almighty answered his prayers alright. Sounds like he dodged a bullet there.

  158. Martian Bachelor says:

    WRT the subject of the OP, it’s too bad the author of that ROK article was so easily taken in by the feminist cant in the NYT piece upon which it’s based.

    All of female dominated education is hostile to males, and it’s no secret men and boys are fleeing in droves. They have no intention of changing things systemically, so the only way to try and stop the hemorraging is by ramping up the sales hype. Being feminist institutions, they naturally think first of the lowest common denominator aspect that sex sells (to men/boys). That’s why the reports about sex on campus these days are predictably going to try and make it sound to naive HS boys as if signing up for classes and the dorms is gonna be like checking into the Playboy Mansion.

    Easy, cheap, no-strings-attached, hassle-free, no nonsense quick sex (only) with 20-ish y.o. college girls? Yea, right.

    That’s really stickin’ it to “the patriarchy”!

    Stay skeptical, my friends.

  159. MarcusD says:

    Someone sent this to me today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WhQ-AEZovE

    What the reports says at the end is… just watch it.

  160. Opus says:

    A first for Dalrock: CFNM

  161. Opus says:

    You have got to see that video clip.

    The set up is that there is this incoherent Welsh Mama’s boy with muscles, the hawt interviewer and the guy’s not unattractive wife. Notice firstly that the interviewer fails to introduce the wife and it is only later that we realise who this other woman holding the outsized cheque must be her. The Interviewer is so hot for the guy she is biting her lip and grabbing for something (what: her pussy, his dick?) at 00.30. She turns to the wife who makes it clear that he is her man, and as the wife witters on about cooking his food the interviewer is giving a hair flick and turning her body as best she can back to the muscleman. At 01.55 the wife mentions the boy’s mother and bored by this sentimentality the interviewer checks out the body builder’s junk, (with a rising lowered gaze). When the wife finally shuts up, the interviewer explains how excited she is and starts touching her left breast. The interviewer is then overcome with incoherence herself and can no longer string her words together she is that excited. The muscle builder then starts wittering on again (very much in the manner of Monty Python’s Jimmy Buzzard sketch) and refers to his wife’s cooking, so the interviewer gives the wife a ‘scratch your eyes’ out smile. Then after some more wittering the interviewer repeats his ‘brought in the package’ statement and the camera draws back so that we can all see that package and then in a Freudian slip moment reminiscent of the famous ‘double penetration’ slip says ‘dicks for tuning in’ so we have no doubt what is really on her mind.

    The guy is of course entirely indistinct form any of his competitors many of whom, so he explains to us, are bigger than him, but the interviewer ones again proves that women are oblivious to men on a lower scale of success and only has eyes for the man holding the glass vase.

  162. greyghost says:

    MarcusD
    That was gina tingle in action.

  163. @ Opus – as previously mentioned. Women “loose it” around a guy whose is physically fit. They have a very difficult time controlling them self.
    Discipline is a very attractive quality and when “done to the body ” in terms of diet /exercise /self control- it is the ultimate trump card in the hands of a alpha.

  164. logic on how to avoid getting robbed at the alter

  165. BradA says:

    Michael Singer,

    > “Many women have had numerous sex partners leaving very very few who had not.”

    That is a bare assertion. What facts do you have to back that up?

    ====

    I am sure many here think I am the “insert your insult here,” but I was going to church very frequently for points in my life and it had nothing to do with being a beta schlub. I want as much of God in my life as I can have. How I have pursued that has varied. I don’t much care if anyone likes it or not.

  166. @Brad – “Many women have had numerous sex partners leaving very very few who had not”
    Are you serious ? You have to be joking – I am being quite serious when I ask this.
    This is coming from a Jewish Christian guy:
    1. dont mean to be arrogant -I have no problem meeting women my age and younger
    2. very disciplined and I waited till marriage
    3. single again at 41 and see 1 & 2 above

    The only chaste / moral / low #n women that I have ran across is women from the Middle/Far East where chastity is guarded.
    In addition there is a old saying – it takes one to know one and the vast majority of American women are far to masculine and unable to bond.

    Here are my thoughts from a cause /effect and sowing / reaping premise (stats dont lie).

    – The amount of children out of wedlock is at all time high.
    – STD’s specifically Herpes Type 2 is increasing
    http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats11/adol.htm
    – Abortion rate
    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6108a1.htm?s_cid=ss6108a1_w
    and
    ” two out of three women having abortions in the U.S. identified as Christian”
    http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
    (might want to reread that again…..)
    – Age of females who have sex
    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/27/peds.2012-3495

    Do I need to continue ??

    Here is what hits me from “Churchanity” theology
    – NT and Pauls teaching of “grace” has been grossly misinterpreted – fornicators will not inherit the Kingdom of G_D – this cannot be denied.
    – Western theology has no witness / power and is viewed as simply hypocritical to secular society.

  167. Pingback: Links and Comments #15 (The “Where’s Poochie?” Edition) | The Society of Phineas

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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