Selfishness as wisdom and virtue.

Sharon Pope expresses a very common sentiment in Why I Hate the Label Mid-Life Crisis:

As women, we’re constantly evolving.

As spiritual beings, we’re waking up.

As seekers, we’re becoming more self-aware.

As mothers and wives, we’re realizing it’s time to put our needs first.

This means we’re changing….growing….developing;

We’re becoming more ourselves.

We’re getting in touch with our needs.

In women, shallow selfishness is presented as deep wisdom, something holy.  Fighting against the virtue of women’s desires and feelings are the forces of evil:

This may make some people in your life uncomfortable.

They will want you to stop changing and go back to who you were.

On her About Me page, Pope explains that this is what she learned when she had an affair and divorced her husband:

I had to learn to love myself, forgive myself and stay true to myself.

What is striking is that while this idea is banal, it is always presented as a deep and profound insight that the woman discovered, an epiphany.  Equally striking is the lack of pushback against this truly vile religion of self worship, especially by Christians.

Related:

Advertisements
This entry was posted in New Morality, Sharon Pope, Solipsism, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists, Whispers, Wife worship. Bookmark the permalink.

123 Responses to Selfishness as wisdom and virtue.

  1. SnapperTrx says:

    It’s the same old rehashed thing over and over again: To make myself feel better about my doing what is wrong I just reframe it into something right, and just!

  2. Pingback: Selfishness as wisdom and virtue. | @the_arv

  3. Emperor Constantine says:

    Dalrock said:
    “Equally striking is the lack of pushback against this truly vile religion of self worship, especially by Christians.”

    This guy (Bishop Barron) gets it mostly right. He misses the broader problem of feminism, but at least catches the narcissism. Quote from the video:

    “The Christian spiritual journey is *NEVER* a journey about self-discovery. Ho hum [no one cares about your “self-discovery”]. It’s a journey towards mission. Now I know I have the privilege of participating in God’s own life, God’s own purpose, which is to bring grace and joy and life into the world.”

  4. Anon says:

    Not to repeat an old point, but this is precisely why Artificial Intelligence will be a disaster for women by 2025. Too many decisions will have female-centrism filtered out, and dynamically treat all humans equally. Plus, the jobs women do are more rote and established, and hence more vulnerable to AI.

    http://www.antifeministtech.info/2015/05/the-real-age-of-ultron-began-in-1985/

  5. Boxer says:

    Emperor Constantine:

    This is a most excellent video. Thanks for posting it. I’d never heard of this Father Barron character.

    He misses the broader problem of feminism, but at least catches the narcissism.

    Nah. He gets it, and addresses it perfectly (without drawing undue attention to it). He’s a true subversive in the best sense of the term.

    His web page, for Catholic bros…
    https://www.wordonfire.org

    Boxer

  6. Emperor Constantine says:

    @Boxer said:
    “Thanks for posting it [the Bishop Barron video].”

    Sure, if you think that is good, you might find this one interesting too.

    Quote from the video: “The story of Ahab and Jezebel shows perfectly how original sin can even affect the institution of marriage.” He calls out Ahab for his weakness and refusal to assume headship, and Jezebel for usurping Ahab’s authority (recall Jezebel signed Naboff’s death warrant in Ahab’s name, quite the usurper that grllll).

    And:

    “Since the fall of Adam and Eve, a Jezebel spirit roams the world seeking to convince women to usurp authority within the family, taking the sceptre from the man.”

  7. CSI says:

    Has anyone seen this site?

    https://mustbethistalltoride.com/2013/07/03/an-open-letter-to-shitty-husbands-vol-1/

    Bluepill male self-flagellation at its finest. If you’re a decent husband who tries his best yet your wife gets booorrred and leaves? Must be all your fault. Of course. Many wives in the comment section agree. They are bored and dissatisfied, it must be their husbands fault. Their husband doesn’t do everything they ask without question. Their husband isn’t constantly telling them romantic platitudes. Their husband doesn’t spend every waking moment with them. Therefore, they must be shitty husbands.

  8. Swanny River says:

    Lot was vexed by the sin around him, but Dalrock brings up a good point about the unexpectedly zealous agreement of the church with such beliefs is also a source of strife, We naturally look to our family for strength and help in such a battle, but we find worse than no help, we have to fight fellow brothers about basic facts!

  9. Oscar says:

    @ Swanny River says:
    June 29, 2017 at 7:28 pm

    “Lot was vexed by the sin around him… ”

    Not enough to actually do something about it, like move his family away from it.

  10. Swanny River says:

    Oscar,
    Sure, but God commended Lot, so he has that going for him. And he could move somewhere, where can a Christian go? We don’t watch TV, or go to movies, and that is a plus, but like Dalrock points, even the Christian culture is deeply entwined with second wave feminism. So even if we all broke off and went Amish, we would be fighting our elders and pastors. Aren’t you one of the military guys here? There is probably (hopefully) no facsimile to the internal division in the army as there is in the Christian house over strong independent women TM.
    I think the selfishness that Dalrock has stopped increasing in popularity, but it very sadly seems to now have a solid market share of at least 25% of Christian minds, even of mature believers.

  11. Lost Patrol says:

    So we want the kind of soulful, nurturing, sustaining love in a partner.

    She wants a Basset Hound. I guess they end up going for cats because even a good dog can be a little needy once in awhile, which might detract from her mission of being the center of all creation. This woman must be the current queen of the myself-as-goddess cult.

  12. Cane Caldo says:

    Equally striking is the lack of pushback against this truly vile religion of self worship, especially by Christians.

    Well, you know Dalrock, until five minutes ago in history Christian men beat their wives. Since then Christian men have gone lame and now they don’t do anything except watch sportsball on TV.

  13. Pingback: Selfishness as wisdom and virtue. | Reaction Times

  14. Pingback: Selfishness as wisdom and virtue. - Top

  15. American says:

    I was reading an old article today by the late Corrie Ten Boom and her work with the late Bill Bright of Campus Crusade for Christ.

    One point that struck me was how they both of these famous Christians insisted they’re spiritual and personal growth was a result of putting God, rather than themselves, first… literally asserting that Christ was the Lord of their heart and life.

    For Corrie, this growth continued in her life even while in Ravensbrück concentration camp where her beloved sister died following the death of her father at the hands of the Nazis proving her method as genuine even in the midst of such great hardship.

    What Corrie and Bill were asserting looks like this: https://cdn1-www.cru.org/content/dam/migration/cru/imagesGraphicsSet/2013/oct/24/10-basic-steps-step-123.jpg.pagespeed.ce.MLbJi3kbRr.jpg

    Now obviously such a “Christ-directed life,” is enmity to a self-absorbed adulteress like Ms. Pope who’s own view is very much at odds looking more like this: https://cdn2-www.cru.org/content/dam/migration/cru/imagesGraphicsSet/2013/oct/24/10-basic-steps-step-122.jpg.pagespeed.ce.lIFim0Q1bJ.jpg

  16. Pope gave up her husband
    Had an affair
    And Remarried!!
    Therefore she is a success.
    Had she been unable to lock down number 2 she would have to get a real job to support herself.
    But then she would be a SIW and a success!!

  17. Gary Eden says:

    “Equally striking is the lack of pushback…by Christians.”

    Not really. They all think that way too. To understand the difference ask yourself…

    How many Christian women do you know call their husband Lord?
    How many Christian women do you know cover their head when praying or in church?
    How many Christian women do you know live to serve their husband?
    How many Christian women were virgins until their wedding night?
    How many Christian women kneel in reverence before their husband?

    How many churches have you heard teach these things? All these are taught in the Bible, but you’ll never learn about them in church. Modern Christianity is cucked; completely co-opted by feminism, even the so-called anti-feminist ones.

    Its been completely hopeless since the rise of feminism in the 20th century but the rot goes back to the 1st century Greeks and touches everything.

  18. Proudly Unaffiliated says:

    Notice that she is now married to a negro. She jettisoned a good man for eroticism, her fantasies. No wonder MGTOW exists.

  19. Anonymous Reader says:

    Somehow this 80’s video seems appropriate about now…

  20. Mark says:

    “”I had to learn to love myself, forgive myself and stay true to myself.””

    This is such a load of crap.All she is doing is rationalizing away the truth.She obviously has no sense of right and wrong….or any morals.She screwed up her marriage because she could not stay away from some Alpha that made her gina tingle.Talk about a screwed up broad.Now she is re-married to a Black guy??…..Lmao! Seems she has tingles for the big black bamboo also.What a clusterfuck!

    **********PAGING Deti and his Hamsterlator!************

  21. Jim says:

    Cunts are gonna cunt.

  22. Spike says:

    What Sharon Pope is doing is simply doubling down on her stupid decisions.
    Deep down, she knows that by blowing up her marriage she has killed a living thing. That will cause a natural consequence: her conscience will start biting at her.
    In order to kill off the voice of conscience, she – and so many women exactly like her who all think they’re unique – doubles down on her decision. She justifies her actions by “positive affirmation” –
    looking toward yourself, not outwardly to God. Thus they therefore detach themselves from, and finally kill off – the voice of conscience.
    It may be a good pointer to young, marriage-minded men: If your prospective wife is doing anything remotely Eastern, you can be pretty sure she is turning from the God of the Bible to the worship of the inner self. It’s a toxic brew that will destroy your relationship, because it will just make it easier and easier for her to justify whatever comes next.

  23. Days of Broken Arrows says:

    Hate to have to do this again, but it’s time to break out the “women’s inspirational quotes” that litter Facebook, Pinterest, Instagram, and other sites. Someone should put together a blog that catalogs all of these ridiculous sayings. I wonder who comes up with this crap and if they really believe it?

  24. Days of Broken Arrows says:

  25. Days of Broken Arrows says:

    I’ll wrap it up at three of these, but I think I’ve made the point in how they bolster the kind of thinking that this post discusses. Also: What could possibly be going on with women that they draw inspiration from this sort of thing? There is no equivalent to this for men (the closest is the occasional Nike slogan, but that’s corporate crap).

  26. earl says:

    The rationalization laments of women who rebel against God.

  27. They feel so entitled.
    Their egos are so inflated.
    It’s so sad. Just find a humble woman.
    -IJ

  28. @Mark:

    We’re pretty sure the machine made a fairly nice fireball as it achieved escape velocity with this one. Though I’m sure deti can tune the next iteration.

  29. Heidi_storage says:

    And right on cue, here’s a poor fellow on CAF whose wife just left and who is most probably about to get taken to the cleaners. She’s already removed $8,000 in savings (that he knows about).

    https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1056831

  30. Keith says:

    I looked at the about me page. Let us all take a moment and say pray for her poor husband. This poor fellow married to a helmet haired worn out feminist. Sharon rode the cc until she caught a quality husband then she probly destroyed him in divorce. She is married to her next victim now and his turn is coming the next time she gets bored and needs some new material for her next book. Look at that picture of him with that grin holding his prize and I think dude if she had as many cocks sticking out of her as she had stuck in her she look like a porcupine.

  31. Fiddlesticks says:

    Here’s a popular one in Spanish that basically says “follow the herd! make sure he’s PRE-SELECTED!”

    It translates to, Stay with the one who has thousands of options but always picks you. I mean, heaven forbid you think for yourself and notice a guy that the rest of your friends aren’t already pining for.

  32. Opus says:

    Mrs Pope does not say whether she is a mother, but she does say that she lives in downtown Columbus, Ohio with the love of her life, best friend, husband and spiritual partner [all one person not four] whose photo reveals this individual to be a very swarthy individual who with all those accomplishments I might easily have mistaken for her pimp. Can all of her seven books have been as she avers Number 1 bestsellers when the latest from as recently as last year is languishing somewhere towards the bottom 3,000,000 on Amazon?

    I am very conflicted about all this; my friend’s marriage is over, and his wife has found love in the arms and bed of a Jazz musician (surely such are the most unreliable people on the planet), her younger daughter does not approve of mother’s behaviour, the older has formed a crush – unreciprocated – on another girl at (boarding) school – and is self harming. My friend’s behaviour was both foolish and cruel and yet his wife who had let herself go had rejected sexually her husband. She is now finding herself with or without the aid of Mrs Pope’s books and pretty much in the same manner that she turfed out her last lover to marry my friend and the one before that to move in with the previous guy and so on. Never been without a boyfriend for so much as one day since the age of fifteen she always said to me though what any male saw in her was always lost on me – half an hour alone in her company had me wanting to end it all.

    Her romantic life strikes me less as evolving than going round in ever-decreasing circles: perhaps she should write a book.

  33. Boxer says:

    Dear Opus:

    I chuckled pretty righteously at her photos yesterday. Note her pose in the full body shot. Clenched folded arms, in a vain attempt to hide both waistline (lack of) and tiddies (flat).

    Mrs Pope does not say whether she is a mother, but she does say that she lives in downtown Columbus, Ohio with the love of her life, best friend, husband and spiritual partner [all one person not four] whose photo reveals this individual to be a very swarthy individual who with all those accomplishments I might easily have mistaken for her pimp.

    I had a laugh at this cuck yesterday. I shouldn’t be so mean. His position in the coupling and the downcast eyes with dumb smile means that Tyrone almost certainly lives a celibate, miserable life, playing housemate to a woman who likes him because she sees him as something less than a human being, but more socially acceptable at the local restaurant than a pet yorkie. He’s almost certainly heard her through the sheetrock, moaning with joy in the arms of someone else (possibly a butch dyke with a dildo, from the looks of the aforementioned photo).

    Yes, my brothers, it certainly appears that Mizz Pope is living the dream. I’m sure her poor ex-husband pines for her daily. What a strong and powerfully empowered Amazon we’re blessed to witness. You go girl!

    Regards,

    Boxer

  34. Boxer says:

    Days of Broken Arrows writes, about vacuous neofeminist inspriational memes on social media:

    I wonder who comes up with this crap and if they really believe it?

    The definitive explanation is rat cheer…

    Women post such nonsense because it’s easier than facing the truth, which would require the work of self-improvement. So much nicer to tell yourself pleasing lies, and then offload the fault for your own misery onto others.

    Boxer

  35. Lets also not for get that for “Christian” women, men’s anger is scary and a form of ‘toxic’ masculinity, but for women it’s “transformative”, cleansing and empowering:

    https://eewc.com/transformative-anger/

  36. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Yeah, I also collect those silly sayings. But I don’t know how to upload images to WordPress.

  37. Oscar says:

    @ Swanny River says:
    June 29, 2017 at 8:14 pm

    “And he [Lot] could move somewhere, where can a Christian go?”

    Some can, some can’t. Some are called to move away, some are called to stay and preach repentance. Lot did neither, no matter how much he was “vexed”. Lot’s passivity is not an option for a Godly man. Look at the results of Lot’s passivity.

    Lot’s wife died (turned into a pillar of salt) and Lot’s two daughters got him drunk and had sex with him. But wait, it gets worse, because Lot’s sons/grandsons became the patriarchs of the Ammonites and the Moabites, both of whom became enemies of the Israelites, Lot’s beloved uncle’s (Abraham) descendants.

    But wait, it gets worse, because the Ammonites worshiped Molech, and the Moabites worshiped Chemosh, both of whom demanded that their worshipers burn children alive as part of their worship.

    Solomon married Ammonite and Moabite women to make peace with those two nations. To keep his wives happy, Solomon built altars to Molech and Chemosh, and even made offerings to them. Though the Bible doesn’t tell us that Solomon sacrificed any children to Molech or Chemosh, eventually, the Israelites (including some of their kings) did just that. And for that reason (among others) God allowed the Assyrians and Babylonians to conquer the Israelites and take them into captivity, and annihilate the Moabites and Ammonites.

    So, Lot’s descendants via incest with his daughters led Abraham’s descendants to prostitute themselves with false gods and sacrifice their children to them, and that led to the annihilation of Lot’s descendants and the conquest of Abraham’s descendants.

    There are terrible consequences for passively accepting the depravity of a place like Sodom, as Lot did. And those consequences echo out through generations.

  38. Jim says:

    And right on cue, here’s a poor fellow on CAF whose wife just left and who is most probably about to get taken to the cleaners. She’s already removed $8,000 in savings (that he knows about).

    https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1056831

    And that little bitch boy stupidly apologized to the cunt. He didn’t overreact at all. The bitch could use a good whipping if we lived in another time. Since he can’t do that he needs to get out NOW. He has no kids so that’s a huge plus. Just take the loss and move on.

    BTW, he needs to move his savings into a new account before he drains the rest of his income. Well, at least for the judge steals even more of his money and hands it over to this harpy.

    Lets also not for get that for “Christian” women, men’s anger is scary and a form of ‘toxic’ masculinity, but for women it’s “transformative”, cleansing and empowering:

    https://eewc.com/transformative-anger/

    When you give them political power that’s what happens.

  39. Gunner Q says:

    Oscar @ 11:06 am:
    “Some can [leave], some can’t. Some are called to move away, some are called to stay and preach repentance. Lot did neither, no matter how much he was “vexed”. Lot’s passivity is not an option for a Godly man.”

    Lot wasn’t the passive type. When the strangers went to the city in Genesis 19, Lot was waiting at the gates and insisted they stay at his house instead of the public square… so he could protect them from the other residents of Sodom, as things turned out. It’s reasonable to assume this was a standard practice of his, protecting and hosting visitors to a city full of militant freaks, given that his conscience was tormented by the evil he saw.

    Neither was there anywhere for him to go. The reason Lot went to Sodom in the first place was because the lands weren’t big enough for both his herds and Abraham’s, per Genesis 13. Had Lot gone the other way, it would have been Abraham in Sodom.

    Nothing in the account of Sodom’s destruction shows Lot accepting the status quo. He protected those he could, saved those who were willing and risked his life & household to do good in the sight of God.

    Turned out that Lot’s wife & daughters were AWALT herd animals. No surprise, no wonder Lot was willing to sacrifice them for the safety of innocent men and per God, no bad reflection on Lot’s character. Although his experience with women does confirm my MGTOW monk decision while living in Commiefornia. Being a righteous man did not save Lot from female-inflicted misery.

  40. Emperor Constantine says:

    @Oscar

    Thanks for that Reader’s Digest summary of Genesis and the true lessons in there. Very very helpful to me as I read through and try to internalize the Old Testament.

    “So, Lot’s descendants via incest with his daughters led Abraham’s descendants to prostitute themselves with false gods and sacrifice their children to them, and that led to the annihilation of Lot’s descendants and the conquest of Abraham’s descendants.

    There are terrible consequences for passively accepting the depravity of a place like Sodom, as Lot did. And those consequences echo out through generations.”

    And history repeats itself: the “Goddesses” prostitute themselves to false gods (in this case, via feminism, themselves as is clear from the discussion in this thread) and sacrifice their children to them via abortion. Dear God I hate to think of the retribution coming our way some day.

  41. tsotha says:

    Equally striking is the lack of pushback against this truly vile religion of self worship, especially by Christians.

    Striking, maybe, but not really surprising. Roughly half the people in the pews are women, and they’ve been primed to explode whenever their religion of the self is criticized.

  42. Oscar says:

    @ Gunner Q says:
    June 30, 2017 at 1:43 pm

    “Lot wasn’t the passive type. When the strangers went to the city in Genesis 19, Lot was waiting at the gates and insisted they stay at his house instead of the public square… so he could protect them from the other residents of Sodom, as things turned out. It’s reasonable to assume this was a standard practice of his, protecting and hosting visitors to a city full of militant freaks, given that his conscience was tormented by the evil he saw.”

    What was he doing in “a city full of militant freaks” in the first place?

    Gen 13:8 So Abram said to Lot, “Please let there be no strife between you and me, nor between my herdsmen and your herdsmen, for we are brothers. 9 Is not the whole land before you? Please separate from me; if to the left, then I will go to the right; or if to the right, then I will go to the left.” 10 Lot lifted up his eyes and saw all the [f]valley of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere—this was before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah—like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt as you go to Zoar. 11 So Lot chose for himself all the [g]valley of the Jordan, and Lot journeyed eastward. Thus they separated from each other. 12 Abram [h]settled in the land of Canaan, while Lot [i]settled in the cities of the [j]valley, and moved his tents as far as Sodom. 13 Now the men of Sodom were wicked [k]exceedingly and sinners against the Lord.

    Note: “So Lot chose for himself all the [g]valley of the Jordan, and Lot journeyed eastward.” He could have chosen a different land. He didn’t, even though he knew that “the men of Sodom were wicked [k]exceedingly and sinners against the Lord”. And he certainly didn’t do it to protect Abraham.

    Furthermore, he didn’t have to live in Sodom. Note that there were other cities, and that he started out living in tents (“Lot [i]settled in the cities of the [j]valley, and moved his tents as far as Sodom.”). But when the angels arrived, he was living in a house inside the city.

    Gen 19:2 And he said, “Now behold, my lords, please turn aside into your servant’s house, and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise early and go on your way.” They said however, “No, but we shall spend the night in the square.” 3 Yet he urged them strongly, so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he prepared a feast for them, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.

    Furthermore, you’re making an assumption that isn’t supported by the text. Nothing in the text tells us that Lot habitually saved travelers from his “militant freak” neighbors (that he chose to live with). Furthermore, even if he did, a man’s first priority is his family. He should’ve been more worried about saving his wife and daughters from his “militant freak” neighbors (that he chose to live with), instead of marrying his daughters to them.

    “Nothing in the account of Sodom’s destruction shows Lot accepting the status quo.”

    Sure it does.

    Gen 19:14 Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who [l]were to marry his daughters, and said, “Up, get out of this place, for the Lord will destroy the city.” But he appeared to his sons-in-law [m]to be jesting.

    Why would Lot choose two men from “a city full of militant freaks” to marry his daughters, if he hadn’t accepted the status quo? If he hadn’t accepted the status quo, why didn’t he do what Abraham did, and look for spouses for his children among his people, who knew the Lord?

    “Turned out that Lot’s wife & daughters were AWALT herd animals.”

    No kidding. Sounds to me like a great reason to NOT MOVE HIS FAMILY TO “A CITY FULL OF MILITANT FREAKS”.

  43. Opus says:

    Further to what I wrote above I was put back in mind of it by Jim and his link to the man at CAF. In that case the man wants to talk to his wife about saving his marriage when the wife obviously has no interest in doing so and where a sum of $8,000 has been snaffled from a joint account. My clueless friend is in exactly the same position: wanting to talk to his wife when she will not even give him five minutes of her precious time and where a far larger sum than $8,000 is sitting in a joint account. Had she not gone to a cheap-skate lawyer who failed to take full instructions that sum would have been transferred into her name pronto. I read my friend the riot act and told him, that 1. His marriage is over and he must start treating his wife as someone keen to do him harm and 2. To get himself some serious legal advice – it will surely be no more expensive in the long run – he needs to transfer the sum or at least the bulk of it into his sole account. I am far too rusty to advise and in any event he is not my client. Men I always notice as with the man at CAF have great difficulty in asserting their own interests, always keen to show how reasonable they are: women no matter what happens see their husband as evil and they no matter the outcome hard done by. The children always trail in a poor third even as the lawyers say everything is in their best interest.

  44. tsotha says:

    Men I always notice as with the man at CAF have great difficulty in asserting their own interests, always keen to show how reasonable they are: women no matter what happens see their husband as evil and they no matter the outcome hard done by.

    It’s not that they see their husband as evil, necessarily, at least in the beginning. It’s just that women can rationalize anything in their interest to be the product of something more noble.

    $8000 is a suspicious sum to go missing from the joint account, btw, since it’s in the boob job neighborhood. If you wife gets a boob job, she’s planning to divorce you. Period.

  45. Oleaginous Outrager says:

    Her distaste of “mid-life crisis” also stems from what appears to be an all-too-common presumption: that other people don’t have complex inner lives. How can they, if they don’t understand the awesomeness of “forgiving yourself” (no matter what you do)? If they really were as amazingly aware emotionally as her, they, too, would be “growing wings and realizing, “Holy shit, I can fly.””!

  46. Gary Eden says:

    Lot was in the gateway of the city. In later times anyway that is where the elders of the community would gather for people to consult with disputes.

    The text doesn’t say why he is there; but it is entirely possible he was an elder and judge of the community (Gen 19:9 hints at that). He also likely had joked with his in-laws about the immorality of the community. Notice also he called the men of the city friends.

  47. RedPillPaul says:

    Food for thought about Sodom and Gomorrah. We put them on a pedestal of “evil” but even God himself (Jesus) said about Sodom and Gomorrah that they would have repented had he did the miracles that he did for the jewish people.

  48. Snowy says:

    With regard to Lot, GunnerQ says, “Although his experience with women does confirm my MGTOW monk decision while living in Commiefornia. Being a righteous man did not save Lot from female-inflicted misery.”

    Indeed. I’ve led a MGTOW monk lifestyle for the past 9 years. I’ve been voluntarily celibate, having as little personal interaction with women as possible; only the bare necessities. While that has changed a little recently, I still have not had sex since 2008, but am getting more personal with a couple of women. What strikes me most about them is the depth of their self-absorption; their narcissism; their solipsism; their selfishness. Sure, they put on a reasonably acceptable facade of not being this way, but the nature of God’s creation is such that they can’t avoid it coming out in one way or another; often with the actions not living up to the words, though even their own words sometimes betray them. They simply can’t hide it.

    The latest example is my prospect blowing off our dinner date. Her reason / excuse simply did not match the events that had transpired. Her excuse was a reasonably obvious lie. And this was from a woman who had previously told me that her number one hate was “people lying”. Obviously her hate for lying only applies to other people lying to her, not her lying. I thank God that He has given me the vision to see these things for what they are. There was a time when I was a far greater fool than I am today.

  49. coloradomtnman says:

    Yeah, that’s one crazy woman.

  50. Hose_B says:

    @Snowy
    Obviously her hate for lying only applies to other people lying to her, not her lying.

    This is universal. But they will rationalize that it’s not lying because the reason she “told” you is somehow true………even if it’s not THE reason.

    ” have to break out date…..my mom is sick”….. then you see her somewhere.
    “I thought your mom was sick?” “Yes, she is…..so I didn’t lie to you.”

    It usually manifests itself in a dizzying array of “true” excuses

  51. Lost Patrol says:

    I thank God that He has given me the vision to see these things for what they are.

    Get out of that thing Snowy.

  52. Boxer says:

    Dear Snowy:

    Is this the 60-year old woman you seemed enamored with a few days ago?

    The latest example is my prospect blowing off our dinner date. Her reason / excuse simply did not match the events that had transpired. Her excuse was a reasonably obvious lie.

    What sort of notice did the blow off give you? There’s a crucial difference between 24 hours and five minutes.

    When a wimminz flakes for a date with more than 8 hours notice, it is not a reason to get upset. Your answer should be brief. A one word text message: cool is my general response. I never trust any wimminz anyway to keep any promises they make, so as long as I have enough notice to find some other wimminz to socialize with that evening, it’s nothing to me.

    Of course you’re right. Her dog got the flu. Her boss’ son got detention at school. Friends popped in unexpectedly from out of town. These are all chickie theatrical shorthand.

    The truth (as all the gentlemen on Dalrock can tell you) is that all wimminz lie all the time. Between then and now, the wimminz you were planning to park your dick in found another dick she liked better, and that dick took your parking spot. The analogy seems crass at first, but I think it fits. You do have a favorite parking spot at the local garage, right? Don’t you get all upset if someone else parks his car in there? No? Why not? It’s the same thing.

    Now, if you spent big money leasing the parking spot in perpetuity, and the attendant put a big sign on the parking spot with your name on it, but you found out some other asshole was parking in there willy nilly while you were away, it’d be different. Doesn’t matter if his brief use while you’re at work doesn’t lower the parking spot quality (it doesn’t), or if he was courteous and always cleaned up any spillage and left it nicer than he found it. It’s an honor thing, then: a matter of principle.

    Boxer

  53. PokeSalad says:

    Being a righteous man did not save Lot from female-inflicted misery.”

    Remember…when God told Satan to take anything he wanted from Job….Satan left Job his wife.

  54. Gunner Q says:

    “Note: “So Lot chose for himself all the valley of the Jordan, and Lot journeyed eastward.” He could have chosen a different land.”

    Remember they went to this land on God’s orders in Genesis 12:1,4. I suppose Lot could have chosen Gomorrah instead, or one of the four kings who kidnapped him and stole his stuff… no improvement over Sodom.

    “Nothing in the text tells us that Lot habitually saved travelers from his “militant freak” neighbors (that he chose to live with).”

    Are you suggesting Lot normally let visitors to the city get raped every night, when we have an account saying he went out of his way (refusing to accept the visitors’ refusal) to prevent it? Most humans are creatures of habit.

    “Why would Lot choose two men from “a city full of militant freaks” to marry his daughters, if he hadn’t accepted the status quo?”

    They had to marry somebody. Abraham had to send to the Old Country to get a spouse for Isaac at great expense; probably Lot didn’t think his daughters were that valuable. If what they eventually did to him was not a total fluke, he was right.

    Gary Eden @ 3:44 pm:
    “Lot was in the gateway of the city. In later times anyway that is where the elders of the community would gather for people to consult with disputes.

    The text doesn’t say why he is there; but it is entirely possible he was an elder and judge of the community (Gen 19:9 hints at that).”

    God would hardly have called such a man righteous, if Lot had been responsible in any way for Sodom’s legendary perversion. Lot was at the city gates in the evening, not the daytime. No doubt a powerful and rich man like Lot had better things to do in the evening than seek out strangers who, by their own admission, wouldn’t have minded sleeping under the stars. Remember Lot *insisted* they stay with him, exactly as if he knew what would happen if they didn’t.

    “Notice also he called the men of the city friends.”

    It’s a cultural thing. Arabs still do that. “Hello my friend, gimme your money and nobody gets hurt.”

  55. Dale says:

    PokeSalad said, “Remember…when God told Satan to take anything he wanted from Job….Satan left Job his wife.”

    hah hah! I never noticed that. Satan took:
    – all of Job’s oxen and donkeys, and all but one of the servants therefor;
    – all of Job’s sheep and all but but one of the servants therefor;
    – all of Job’s camels and all but one of the servants thereof;
    – all of Job’s sons and daughters;
    – Job’s good health.
    Satan did a pretty thorough job of taking everything good from Job. Even the mediocre things got taken from Job; you can’t tell me that ALL Job’s animals were good, or that all his children were perfect “angels”. But Satan left him his wife.
    I wonder how the above would fit into the next pastor’s sermon about how valuable a wife would be for? How the reluctant victims-in-waiting at his church who will not debase themselves by accepting an unworthy wife are “missing out”, and failing to properly serve God?

    @Oscar
    >why didn’t he do what Abraham did, and look for spouses for his children among his people, who knew the Lord?

    Certainly it was unintentional, but you have engaged in feminist reasoning, and therefore your reasoning is very flawed.
    Yes, Abraham sought a woman to leave her family and agree to come marry his son. And offered significant wealth to appeal to the woman. Remember the gold bands put on Rebekah?
    Money is an attractor for women. But men are not women; despite the lies of our culture, men are different. Therein is your error.

    While many women would be willing to uproot from their city for a (sight-unseen) wealthy spouse, how many men would do that?
    As a man who has been very blessed by God, I would see no value in the prospect to marry a wealthy woman. In fact, her wealth would be a significant deterant, as she obviously does not need me and thus would have little problem should she decide to leave. (Same reasoning unfortunately also goes for every woman in a western nation that has welfare and divorce theft.)
    Sure, some men would agree to come to a new city to marry a woman they have never met, simply as a business decision to get the wealth presumably on offer from Lot. But that somehow does not seem like it would be appealing to a father who wants a good husband for his daughter.

  56. Vektor says:

    “men’s anger is scary and a form of ‘toxic’ masculinity”

    Yes. I am “toxic”. I long for the day where I see a female in distress so I can do….nothing. I seethe with RAGE because the system has me a SLAVE.

    With women there is ALWAYS a price to pay. Don’t pay it. Your level of engagement is based on your tolerance for risk or your level of ignorance. There is ALWAYS a price to pay. Don’t pay it.

  57. BillyS says:

    CSI,

    I plan to write a future post on my blog about the modern unpardonable sin – making your wife unhappy.

    Too many Christians operate as if that is true, even if they would not admit it outright.

  58. Mark says:

    Happy Canada Day to all my fellow Canucks here at Dalrocks.

  59. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    Lot had serious flaws, but the confession of the men of Sodom was that his “righteousness” hassled them, so I doubt he was completely silent.

  60. BillyS says:

    Snowy,

    I find it funny the number of female profiles on dating sites that note the women “hates games.” A few of them who had that showed me they played games quite well, either in the rest of their profile or in our brief conversations.

  61. BillyS says:

    PokeSalad,

    Remember…when God told Satan to take anything he wanted from Job….Satan left Job his wife.

    I had not considered that before. Good thing to bring out. Satan did kill his kids, but not his wife.

  62. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Satan was wise to spare the wife. She not only tormented Job, she was assisting Satan by urging Job to curse and reject God.

    Job 2:9-10

    His wife said to him, “Are you still maintaining your integrity? Curse God and die!”

    He replied, “You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?” In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.

  63. Pariah says:

    Hey, off topic, but just wondering: what has happened to Scott? His blog has almost everything deleted…?

  64. earl says:

    I hope everyone gets the many lessons from the Bible…a woman who causes you to reject God or more specifically Satan using a woman to do that…is not in your best interests.

    The only difference between Job’s story and Adam’s is that Job didn’t reject God’s commands.

  65. Snowy says:

    Yes, Boxer; the same 60 year old chick I was enamoured with the other day. What can I say? Fool am I. But only so foolish. She gave me virtually no notice at all. Literally just before I was about to leave to drive to her place. Some BS about slipping on the floor while getting out of the shower. Found herself some other dick, she did! Thankfully God caused me to dodge a bullet with both these first class bitches: mother and daughter. I’ll be having a few one night stands from the pubs and clubs instead! F$&k putting up with all that BS. One night stands for me.

  66. DadofHomeschoolers says:

    I find the comments about Lot and the Sodom interesting.
    But isn’t an answer to this question come a lot earlier in the story? Wasn’t Abram supposed to pack up and leave “his father’s house and country?” To me it reads that he was to leave everything and everyone behind. Was Lot even supposed to be along on the journey? Was Abram disobeying God by even having him along?
    FWIW

  67. Boxer says:

    Dear Snowy:

    Yes, Boxer; the same 60 year old chick I was enamoured with the other day. What can I say? Fool am I. But only so foolish. She gave me virtually no notice at all. Literally just before I was about to leave to drive to her place. Some BS about slipping on the floor while getting out of the shower. Found herself some other dick, she did! Thankfully God caused me to dodge a bullet with both these first class bitches: mother and daughter. I’ll be having a few one night stands from the pubs and clubs instead! F$&k putting up with all that BS. One night stands for me.

    I never make a big deal about her flaking. Five minutes notice, with a lame-ass excuse like that, gets a one word response (usually: gay) and the ho’ number deleted from my contact lists.

    The weird thing is, more than half the time, these bitches reappear. Don’t be surprised if, a couple weeks from now, she finds herself in her own dry spell and wants some attention, so she sends you a cheesy “what up?” type message. At that point you can decide whether to ignore it, or whether to allow her to re-enter your orbit (at a wildly reduced level of interest and commitment).

    In the interim, this song’s for you (very crass, but true).

    http://wp.me/p47gnx-C8

    Regards,

    Boxer

  68. Disillusioned says:

    The deeper problem is how the church has embraced psychology. Psychology is all about ME while Christianity is about Him, His Kingdom and others. Psychology teaches that until one”s needs are met, one can not help anyone. So, psychology is a constant never ending pilgrimmage into improving one self. This is in contrast to God telling us to put others before ouselves and that there is no greater love than a man laying down his life so that another may live.

  69. Dalrock says:

    Happy Canada Day Mark.

  70. anonymous_ng says:

    @Opus – “Men I always notice as with the man at CAF have great difficulty in asserting their own interests, always keen to show how reasonable they are: women no matter what happens see their husband as evil and they no matter the outcome hard done by. The children always trail in a poor third even as the lawyers say everything is in their best interest.”

    I would say that in most cases that’s true. The kids tell me that my ex talks a lot of crap about me, but I was able to manage her self-image as that of a woman who didn’t screw over her ex, her kids’ father, and in so doing managed to control things at a cost only slightly higher than I’d have paid in a true adversarial dog fight in court.

    I realized early on that if I could pay a little bit here and there to appear generous, and to stay out of court, I was coming out the winner.

    It helped that I realized that though she’d moved out and was happy to live like we were divorced and have me pay, she wasn’t keen on making it official. That was too scary. So, I filed the papers and made things happen, and she had a breakdown in front of the judge.

    I wish your friend clear vision and decisive action.

  71. Kaminsky says:

    “the same 60 year old chick I was enamoured with the other day”

    Well to each their own, but I won’t make that statement until I’m 105 years old. Do you have overseas travel options?

  72. MarcusD says:

    What is your opinion of movies like Bad Moms?
    https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1056731

    My wife just left me
    https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1056831

    Single sisters, be careful out there in the dating world
    https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1056921

  73. feeriker says:

    Yes, Boxer; the same 60 year old chick I was enamoured with the other day. What can I say? Fool am I. But only so foolish.

    She’s the even bigger fool. Probably not worth wasting the time of day on a woman that stupid.

  74. Spacetraveller says:

    @ Gary Eden,

    “Not really. They all think that way too. To understand the difference ask yourself…

    How many Christian women do you know call their husband Lord?
    How many Christian women do you know cover their head when praying or in church?
    How many Christian women do you know live to serve their husband?
    How many Christian women were virgins until their wedding night?
    How many Christian women kneel in reverence before their husband?

    How many churches have you heard teach these things? All these are taught in the Bible, but you’ll never learn about them in church. Modern Christianity is cucked; completely co-opted by feminism, even the so-called anti-feminist ones.”

    Your comment made me think!

    “How many Christian women do you know call their husband Lord?”
    You may not believe me (not that I would blame you!) but a client of mine, who is roughly my age, perhaps slightly younger, does this. She is African, married to a Swiss man (I live in Switzerland) and she uses a rather archaic word whenever she refers to her husband. This word literally means ‘Lord’ or ‘Master’ and is usually only used by very old ladies. I found this so intriging that she does this – and I have to admit, it gladdened my heart to hear this. She and her baby come regularly to me, and after a while, I ‘stole’ her attitude and starting calling my own husband the equivalent word of ‘boss’ (‘chef’ in french and german or ‘il capo’ in italian – hey, we are polylingual over here, lol), and two strange things happenend: people would look at me like I am ‘not quite all there’, if you see what I mean, like I am a little bit stupid or something, but that’s OK. I am used to that.
    The second (unexpected) complication was that my husband at first didn’t like it! After a while, I realised that he was getting ‘push back’ from people who think he is somehow ‘abusing’ me if my attitude is such that I call him ‘Lord’ outside of some sort of ‘private joke’ or I suppose ‘bedroom game’ or whatever.
    I persisted with this ‘boss’ thing, and I notice now that he smiles whenever I say it. Either he doesn’t care about the ‘push back’ anymore, or it has stopped, I am not sure. But it makes us both happy, so I do it. I won’t OVERDO it though.

    “How many Christian women do you know cover their head when praying or in church?”
    Well… in a normal Mass setting, I am not sure this is strichtly required of Christian or Catholic women in this day and age. I believe one’s demeanour in church counts for more. Having said that, we just attended Saturday evening Mass and it was raining so we were both wearing hats when we arrived at the church and inside, my husband automatically removed his, whereas I instinctively kept mine on, feeling that I have an obligation to do so.
    I do believe though that in an ancient church, we women should cover our heads. I remember a long time ago when I was single, I was in a group being shown around an Italian town as part of a sightseeing group. We entered a really ancient-looking basilica, and all of a sudden I panicked, knowing instinctively I should cover my head, but alas, I had no veil with me! Luckily, I had a neck scarf on (it was in November), so I used that to cover my head. A muslim colleague of mine who was in the group later said to me that he was surprised I did that, was I muslim? I said, no, just Catholic, and he said he did not know that this head-covering rule applied to Christian women… but I can see how he gets that impression: It is not a rule we adhere to strictly. I think only nuns cover their heads, and even so, not ALL nuns.

    “How many Christian women do you know live to serve their husband?”
    Well, the good news here is that I DO know several! I really do! I hope I can include myself in this esteemed group! (Erm, but I guess you will have to confirm with ‘the boss’ 🙂

    “How many Christian women were virgins until their wedding night?”
    Ahhh, well…can you keep a secret…?
    No, jokes apart, I actually do know quite a few of these, thanks to my profession. Let’s just say, at my work people have to tell me intimate details of their lives…
    Admittedly, it is fewer numbers than I would expect for age-group categories, yes.

    I didn’t get married very ‘young’ personally, but I have to say, I always had it in the back of my mind that if some poor guy were to take the plunge with me, he would have to get me ‘fresh off the press’ so to speak. This was quite separate from my religious upbringing. I think it is very important, not just for religious reasons, but also for peace of mind. No trips to the nearest STD clinic just before the wedding, etc.

    “How many Christian women kneel in reverence before their husband?”
    Now look here, young man… 🙂

    Again, no joke but I have actually personally done this once.But alas, only in jest, so it may not count, as a serious answer to your question.
    A few weeks after our wedding, I somehow ‘offended’ my husband. I can’t remember what I did, but after resisting and acting all defensive, I finally apologised to him. But he …wasn’t happy with my apology. He said it had taken me too long to own up to what I did (which is true, dang!)
    My punishment? If I meant to apologise sincerely, I would have to…kneel down and kiss his feet.
    He was smiling, so I tried to give him a cuddle as a way to say, I comply. Didn’t work. He wouldn’t respond to a cuddle until I knelt down and kissed his feet.
    It was all in a good-natured way, and he later told me he WAS joking and hadn’t really expected me to do it. Yeah, cudda fooled me… 🙂

    But you know, this is not something a woman might share with even friends or colleagues, so I am not sure if you expect anyone to be able to answer this particular question! I only regale you with my own personal experience because it is relevant here, but I don’ think I have told this to even a relative. There is never any ‘entry point’ in a conversation which leads one to tell all about ‘that time when I was kneeling down at my husband’s feet’… D’you see what I mean? This by the way also applies to the ‘virgin on wedding night question’. It is of course deeply private, and people don’t really share this sort of information with others unless it is in an anonymous setting (like here on this blog, for instance).
    “How many churches have you heard teach these things?”

    Well, sadly, I have to put my hands up in the air and surrender…you are right, I don’t hear anyone preaching these things, not even in my beloved Catholic church.
    I hear the sermons of some die-hard preachers out there who seem to be immune to the gynocentrism engulfing us all, but I can literally count them on the fingers of one hand.

    It is pretty isolating trying to be that godly wife I always dreamed about being. But the isolation is worth it. And it gladdens my heart when I come across a like-minded woman. It is so rare as to be deliciously precious though, but I guess we are not competing in a popularity contest, so all cool.

    It is nice to keep getting encouragement and words of wisdom from the sane team-members here on this blog, including Mr. Dalrock himself. It is a completely mad world now, I have to admit. I am so glad I found you before I walked down that long aisle…

  75. “we’re constantly evolving”

    Not all evolution is for the better. Evolution took away the dodo bird’s ability to fly.

  76. Snowy says:

    Of course you’re right, Boxer; I need to drink a cup of cement and harden up; there’s no need for me to make such a big deal out of some dumb floozy flaking on me; who am I to think I may actually mean something to her? Indeed there are no Unicorns. All men are truly disposable to all women. It’s another reason I’ll be picking up one night stands from the pubs and clubs again; no flaking involved there, when it’s on it’s on, when it’s not it’s not. I may be 50 years of age now, but I still have plenty of chick-pulling power: good quality youthful-looking skin, ruggedly handsome face, and a pretty tight, muscular body. Not bad if I do say so myself! I may be a bit old-fashioned in that I don’t know what a one-word “gay” response might be. Perhaps you have some suggestions?

    Kaminsky: Yes, I know what you mean. I am quite capable of pulling younger chicks. In fact younger chicks seem to be drawn to me more so than older. And I don’t think it’s purely the “father-figure” thing. Yes, I am planning to travel abroad in the medium-term future: Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Greece, Italy, USA for starters. I have to make a success, with my fellow company director, of the business I’ve recently started. It will be successful, and I will travel as planned. Might even visit some of you fellows. I’d love to do that.

    Feeriker: I’m not nearly as big a fool as I once was. Yet, we can all still get sucked in, to a degree. At the same time, women seem to have a real talent at mucking things up for themselves; ultimately, they’re wildly self-destructive. And they usually give us no choice but to let them stew in their own misery. Indeed, they are the bigger fools. Stupid is as stupid does. As my good mate says, “Zero plus zero equals zero.” That’s how dumb they are.

  77. Boxer says:

    Dear Snowy:

    I may be a bit old-fashioned in that I don’t know what a one-word “gay” response might be. Perhaps you have some suggestions?

    It’s basically just a minimalist response, meant to express mild annoyance, to a flaking ho’. For example:

    Her: Oh Boxer I’m so sorry! I know you’ve prepped for dinner, but I can’t meet you in ten minutes, because there’s been a nuclear accident at my boss’ house and I have to go pick up his cat and take it to the veterinarian. Radiation sickness kills! I promise I’m not flaking! Let’s meet up tomorrow, OK?

    Me: gay

    And that’s all the response I give to a ho’. She certainly doesn’t deserve any better. They usually try and send subsequent texts, which are ignored outright. I have better things to do.

    Such women aren’t terrible. They’re just women. All women act like this, and there’s really no point in getting all upset about it. The best thing to do is to have a series of women in your contact list, so that in the event of a last minute bail, you can still have fun. Keep meeting the ladies and just keep a bunch of them on a rotating standby.

    Best,

    Boxer

  78. BillyS says:

    Unicorns do exist and they are unicorns for the very reason they are so rare. The odds of finding one are very rare, to the point of impossible for most. Deal with one if you find one,, but be very skeptical and don’t immediately believe one who seems to be a u unicorn.

  79. Bandit says:

    Just sounds like rationalization to me

  80. Lost Patrol says:

    Dalrock becoming a regular feature on Instapundit these days.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/ July 1, 2017

    21ST CENTURY RELATIONSHIPS: Selfishness as wisdom and virtue.

  81. Jim says:

    As women, we’re constantly evolving.

    As spiritual beings, we’re waking up.

    As seekers, we’re becoming more self-aware.

    As mothers and wives, we’re realizing it’s time to put our needs first.

    This means we’re changing….growing….developing;

    We’re becoming more ourselves.

    We’re getting in touch with our needs.

    This is what happens when you don’t have the balls to tell women to shut up and do as they’re told. The more you kiss their ass the worse things get. Be a simp and you’ll quickly become cucked. It really is that simple. It’s one of the biggest reasons the West is dying. Matriarchies never last.

  82. Regarding the guy whose wife left and pulled out $8000… the story about her going out to happy hour, staying gone a long time, then all of a sudden bailing out after it seemed things were resolving and all the ‘Sorry’s: I think there’s a good chance she did some drinking and screwed somebody that night. Then her guilt rationalizer turned it into all about him.

  83. tim maguire says:

    I see ony 1 comment there. Is Sharon Pope someone whose opinions we should care about?

  84. frankdn says:

    Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Textbook case.

  85. earl says:

    ‘She’s the even bigger fool. Probably not worth wasting the time of day on a woman that stupid.’

    I’d agree with that sentiment. I’d disagree with his course of action which is going the self-destructive sinful route. It’s not really going to solve anything and will heap on more pain.

  86. Trust says:

    @Jim: “This is what happens when you don’t have the balls to tell women to shut up and do as they’re told. The more you kiss their ass the worse things get. Be a simp and you’ll quickly become cucked. It really is that simple. It’s one of the biggest reasons the West is dying. Matriarchies never last.”
    ________

    Translation: Be a RealMan(TM) like Jim and this will never happen to you.

  87. earl says:

    ‘Translation: Be a RealMan(TM) like Jim and this will never happen to you.’

    More power to him if he can control a rebellious woman. I think it’s easier to command an army of 1 million men.

  88. awkward female commenter says:

    Hey, I’m wondering what a good Christian denomination is. I’m looking through churches and finding not a lot good.

    I was at a coffee place the other day, and listening to girls who were having a conversation. They both knew each other from church. One of them was talking about how it was difficult being single: how she only had time for work and getting things done, eating and sleeping.

    The other girl tried to relate the first girl’s experience with her own then hijacked the conversation and took center stage. “Oh yeah, it’s so hard. I know I’m married, but I dated a guy for four years and breaking up with him was REALLY HARD, because there was so much time invested in the relationship (I’m not sure who broke up with whom). But he didn’t really care about me the way a husband should. Then God told me to date the man who is now my husband. We had already known each other before I dated my other boyfriend, and he had let me know that he was interested in dating me back then. So, I knew he was an option (as she signaled her superior SMV to her chubby friend). Life is so hard, we HAD to live with each other for financial reasons, and then we got married. So the moral of this story is you really need to follow God.”

    When I first started listening to the conversation, I felt like they might be nice girls, even though I intellectually knew the other shoe was going to drop. I hoped maybe this church was the exception, and that everyone was living Biblically and was nice and normal. I told a friend of mine later that this is why we don’t go to church anymore. It’s so weird.

    He waited for five or six years to have sex with this woman? Did the other guy have sex with her? Either one or both of them waited for half a decade to get any. And hubby might have been a cuckold, waiting and watching for four years as she boffed the other one. I guess we’ll never know in exactly which way that scenario was bizarre.

    I’m looking for a church with fairly normal people and a veil of decency. Does anyone have any suggestions?

  89. Boxer says:

    Dear Fellas:

    @some username too long and stochastic to remember.

    I think there’s a good chance she did some drinking and screwed somebody that night. Then her guilt rationalizer turned it into all about him.

    That’s correct.

    @Trust

    Translation: Be a RealMan(TM) like Jim and this will never happen to you.

    It’s actually a lot simpler and easier than you think. You just have to lose the mindset that your wife or girlfriend is some sort of perfect goddess. When you think about it, that delusion isn’t fair to her, either.

    Once this is done, you can tell women ‘no’ as easily as you can with men. Try it out. Next time a naggy bitch tries to guilt/shame/harass you into doing your supposed duty, just tell the bitch no.

    Boxer

  90. feeriker says:

    It’s actually a lot simpler and easier than you think. You just have to lose the mindset that your wife or girlfriend is some sort of perfect goddess. When you think about it, that delusion isn’t fair to her, either.

    Once this is done, you can tell women ‘no’ as easily as you can with men. Try it out. Next time a naggy bitch tries to guilt/shame/harass you into doing your supposed duty, just tell the bitch no.

    Boxer

    Yup.

    Once you abandon the idea that she controls you, that your future is in the palms of her mercurial little hands, or that her leaving you is the end of the world, then telling her “NO!” becomes a LOT easier. I found this out wiith my fiancee three years ago, not long after we first met and when I had to draw a line in the sand and say “you will NOT cross this and continue to be partof my life!” And then backed it up with two days of isolation. We’ve never had a falling out or major disagreement since.

    I’d like to think that had I been red pill-aware decades ago that this attitude and reaction would have saved my first marriage. Maybe, maybe not, but the reaction by the ex-wife would probably, if nothing else, have verified her “wife credentials” (or lack thereof) much sooner and spared both of us a LOT of needless pain.

  91. BillyS says:

    I would agree with that sentiment feeriker. Knowing things farther back may have saved my own marriage, but the rot was there from the start, I just didn’t realize it and my wife never wanted to quite abandon the core underlying ideas she kept suppressed (for the most part) until near the end.

    I am not sure if that idea is optimism or reality. I suspect it is a mix of both. Someone who knows the true situation is going to have a better job maintaining it than someone who doesn’t realize the huge risks just under the surface.

  92. Kevin says:

    This is a completely anti-Christ sentiment but even by traditional secular philosophy is just modern mental mush. Whenever anyone is trying to find themselves they are generally gearing up to do something stupid or give up tradition and culture. Meditation and introspection are useful. Change is normal. But people who need to go on and on about it are usually covering their sins.

  93. Kevin says:

    @Spacetraveller

    In the US men, in order to signal their wives are their equal partners, humiliate themselves by calling their wives “Boss”. I was at dinner with a great guy last night and he was telling how he moved to the area and in a point of the story he says, “So I had to check with the boss”. Just makes my stomach turn.

    But I agree if a woman did that everyone would freak out by we are comfortable with men doing that all the time.

  94. Mineter says:

    I also hate the “better half” thing.

    I mildly freaked out some colleagues at work when, after playing dumb about what the phrase meant, I unashamedly proclaimed “but I’M the better half, in every conceivable way”.

    And they knew this was true.

  95. Baker says:

    Narcissism as virtue?

    [Dalrock, can you please insert the image in this post?]

  96. daystar says:

    Off topic, but Im a 21 male and im about to enter the dating scene as Im ready to get married. Any advice for a christian believer in traditional marriage

  97. earl says:

    ‘In the US men, in order to signal their wives are their equal partners, humiliate themselves by calling their wives “Boss”.’

    Which funny…would signal that they aren’t equal partners. There is always a hierarchy in marriage…the God ordained one and the zeitgeist one. Guess which one works in the long run.

  98. Swanny River says:

    Earl,
    The answer is the Zeitgeist way. But being well trained in blue pill thinking, I will call it the biblical. See, its all good, and I did that without breaking a sweat. Now here is my question for you, why do you need to be so divisive and why don’t you just shut up and let the Churchians lead? It would be much more peaceful if you stopped bringing up women’s rebelliousness and selfishness, now it is that kind of talk that stirs up the sinful urges in the wimynfolk. (End of sarcasm) .

  99. earl says:

    My apologies…how can the devil continue to tear up more marriages and families through divorce if husbands start taking responsibility and wives quit trying to usurp the authority.

  100. Swanny River says:

    You still have not turned fully to the blue side yet, it’s not the devil breaking up marriages, it is men. Men who refuse to step up, and those who have but are brutes who don’t listen to their pure and better half’s.

  101. Oscar says:

    @ Gunner Q says:
    June 30, 2017 at 6:58 pm
    “Note: “So Lot chose for himself all the valley of the Jordan, and Lot journeyed eastward.” He could have chosen a different land.”

    “Remember they went to this land on God’s orders in Genesis 12:1,4. I suppose Lot could have chosen Gomorrah instead, or one of the four kings who kidnapped him and stole his stuff… no improvement over Sodom.”

    Try looking at a map. The valley into which he moved extends south. He could have moved further south away from all those cities. Lot was a herdsman, after all.

    “Are you suggesting Lot normally let visitors to the city get raped every night, when we have an account saying he went out of his way (refusing to accept the visitors’ refusal) to prevent it? Most humans are creatures of habit.”

    I’m not suggesting anything. I’m telling you that you’re reading something into the text that isn’t there.

    “They had to marry somebody.”

    Why did it have to be two men from a city “full of militant freaks”? Why couldn’t he send them “to the Old Country” to marry men there?

    “Abraham had to send to the Old Country to get a spouse for Isaac at great expense; probably Lot didn’t think his daughters were that valuable. If what they eventually did to him was not a total fluke, he was right.”

    Which, again, sounds to me like a great reason TO NOT MOVE HIS FAMILY INTO “A CITY FULL OF MILITANT FREAKS”.

  102. Oscar says:

    @ BillyS says:
    July 1, 2017 at 2:27 am

    “Lot had serious flaws, but the confession of the men of Sodom was that his ‘righteousness’ hassled them, so I doubt he was completely silent.”

    Lot was more righteous than his neighbors. Of that there is no doubt. But, first of all, that ain’t saying much. And second, the fact still remains that he chose to make them his neighbors.

  103. Oscar says:

    @ Dale says:
    June 30, 2017 at 8:36 pm

    “Yes, Abraham sought a woman to leave her family and agree to come marry his son. And offered significant wealth to appeal to the woman. Remember the gold bands put on Rebekah?
    Money is an attractor for women. But men are not women; despite the lies of our culture, men are different. Therein is your error.”

    Your error is that you’re reading into my writing something that isn’t there. Lot could have taken or sent his daughters to his homeland to marry men there. He didn’t have to bring men from his homeland, nor did he have to marry they off to Sodomites. Nor did he have to move to Sodom in the first place.

  104. Novaseeker says:

    You still have not turned fully to the blue side yet, it’s not the devil breaking up marriages, it is men. Men who refuse to step up, and those who have but are brutes who don’t listen to their pure and better half’s.

    Well, and the fact that there is a widespread assumption that the husband is ultimately responsible for the wife’s sin, based on the widespread interpretation of Genesis by the same crowd that Adam was responsible for Eve’s sin. That interpretation winds its way into how they view marriage in a more or less direct way, which makes everything that happens in the marriage, even if it is a sin committed by the wife, the husband’s fault because he is the head, and he is therefore responsible for it. That’s the basis for the attitude in most cases — easily as much as feminism is.

  105. dragnet says:

    @ Novaseeker

    “Well, and the fact that there is a widespread assumption that the husband is ultimately responsible for the wife’s sin, based on the widespread interpretation of Genesis by the same crowd that Adam was responsible for Eve’s sin. That interpretation winds its way into how they view marriage in a more or less direct way, which makes everything that happens in the marriage, even if it is a sin committed by the wife, the husband’s fault because he is the head, and he is therefore responsible for it.”

    Even this wouldn’t be so bad if husbands were given the full measure of authority that this kind of responsibility requires. But I agree that this is a flawed interpretation of the creation story, especially when Eve was given her own set of punishments by God which would not have happened if God had held only her husband responsible.

  106. earl says:

    ‘But I agree that this is a flawed interpretation of the creation story, especially when Eve was given her own set of punishments by God which would not have happened if God had held only her husband responsible.’

    Could you imagine having to work for what you eat and have to bear and raise children? You’d be the modern day example of an empowered independent woman.

  107. Disillusioned says:

    My experience on dating sites is that whatever women list as not wanting is what they have experience in. If they say they are not into the bar scene it means they recently were into it until guys didnt pay anymore attention to them. If they say they are not into one night stand it means they have done it. If they claim to hate liars and want no drama it means they lie and are drama queens.

    For instance, I dont have to mention that I dont date cannibals and women that love the taste of human flesh because I dont have any experience in that.

  108. earl says:

    ‘My experience on dating sites is that whatever women list as not wanting is what they have experience in.’

    A wise man once told me it’s not so much what they say, but why they are saying it.

  109. Swanny River says:

    Dragnet,
    You said it wouldn’t be so bad if the authority was restored. I can’t think of a better description of a successful rebellion. With the church helping, the husband’s authority has been crippled. We had Grudem feeling embarrassed and on an apology tour that seems self-authored to kick it off.
    I listened to a sermon yesterday by Milton Vincent. Great points including the need to be sexually submissive to the husband, but it was always premised in the women being more spiritual and the husband needing their guidance. So in this, the confusion was shown. They think they ate following a biblical model, but ate rooting it in a modern politeness that masks itself as being Christian. So they can leave out rebelliousness from a sermon because they think women will choose the right way on their own. Thus, the leaders really don’t understand my problem with them. They see themselves as preaching God’s Word and calling us to trust in him and treating women with sensitivity, so they can’t see anything wrong in the blue pill thinking.

  110. Lost Patrol says:

    @daystar

    Right here at the top of Dalrock’s banner see “finding a spouse” posts. Many other posts and commentary here that will help set the stage for you.

    Here also:

    https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/

    the exact subject you mention is examined in many posts and comments.

    Also here:

    https://donalgraeme.wordpress.com/

    Forewarned is forearmed. You were wise to begin in this neck of the woods.

  111. SirHamster says:

    I’m looking for a church with fairly normal people and a veil of decency. Does anyone have any suggestions?

    The church is a hospital for the sick.

    Filter what you can of churchian traits, but you’re not perfect enough for the perfect church. If Jesus is the center and the truth is preached, the rest can be worked out.

  112. Swanny River says:

    Sir Hamster,
    So would you say Dalrock and similar blogs are the “working out” the other issues. Because, as I mentioned above, churches who preach the word are those that feel more strongly that they have the marital part correctly taught.

  113. Dale says:

    @Oscar:
    > Lot could have taken or sent his daughters to his homeland to marry men there.

    Agreed. If he wanted to have a chance to vet the prospective grooms, it would have been necessary to either go there himself or send a trusted servant, as Abraham did. Still, it was possible.

  114. SirHamster says:

    So would you say Dalrock and similar blogs are the “working out” the other issues.

    Men of God, don’t just sit here and listen. Go and do. Reclaim Christ’s church, whether building up from scratch or arousing the sleepwalking.

    This is a great blog, but in of itself is not a church.

  115. Norman Vance says:

    This hit very close to home for me, as I was nearing my 30th wedding anniversary when my ‘former’ wife hit me out of the blue with the “I’m unhappy, get out” line, as she had fallen for a fellow at her work. She later misquoted Isaiah 9:4 “break the chains that bind” as her “holy” excuse. Even worse was that she expected me to live out in the garage shop I’d built and continue to do all of the care and maintenance for her as a “good neighbor”. I’m now married to an amazing women, who lost her husband of thirty years to a stroke around the same time I was given the boot, and we’ve both run away to paradise.

  116. Oscar says:

    @ Dale says:
    July 3, 2017 at 2:57 pm

    “Agreed. If he wanted to have a chance to vet the prospective grooms, it would have been necessary to either go there himself or send a trusted servant, as Abraham did. Still, it was possible.”

    Exactly. The people in Bible – no matter how righteous – provide us with examples of what to do, and what NOT to do. Lot provides us with an example of what NOT to do in this case.

  117. W.B.Kotter says:

    “Great points including the need to be sexually submissive to the husband”

    dom/sub crap has no place in christendom

  118. feministhater says:

    A woman is to be submissive to her husband in all things, including sex. Your white knighting is tiresome Kotter.

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