No respect for men who marry single mothers.

Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary has a 2016 article by Sam Parkison excoriating Christian men for not marrying single mothers.  Parkison calls Christian men’s preferences in this regard vanity, and repeats the charge three times:

But functionally, marriage is still idealized to be something vainer than what Scripture calls it.

1. Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a wife.

“He who finds a wife finds a good thing.” (Proverbs 18:22) Period. A wife is a gift of God’s grace, and grace is undeserved. If this is the case, then having the vain expectation of marrying a childless virgin is unwarranted.

We are not told in Ephesians 5:22-31 that marriage is intended to satisfy vain expectations, or that it’s the entitled reward of a virgin for a virgin…

Parkison opens with a lengthy criticism of the Evangelical purity movement.  What he gets wrong however is the problem with the movement is not that it stresses purity while delaying marriage, but that it focuses on waiting instead of marrying.  His frame is that the sin of single mothers is that they failed to keep themselves pure during what modern Christians euphemistically call “the wait”.  The biblical perspective however is that they chose fornication instead of marriage.  As the Apostle Paul explains in 1 Cor 7:8-9 (ESV):

To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Parkison assures us that all of the single mothers in the church know they sinned (facts not in evidence), but he is oddly silent regarding repentance:

Many of the single moms in our churches became single moms by virtue of having sex out of wedlock. As a Christian, I make no bones about the fact that such an act was sinful. In fact, the Christian single mom also acknowledges that her act of sex outside of marriage was a sin.

In fairness to the unrepentant single mothers, men like Parkison stressing what a gift their out of wedlock child is to their future husband, and what a boon it will be to their marriage has to make repentance seem unnecessary.  The fruits of her past sin will make their marriage (and therefore her husband) more holy! (emphasis mine)

…a biblical understanding of children leads us to conclude that the baby produced by this sinful act is an unimaginably grand and beautiful gift!

…such a marriage also has the potential of reflecting the gospel to an even greater degree, since it reflects not only Christ’s love for his Bride, but also the Father’s love for his adopted children! Far from being a burden, marriage to a single mom is brimming with gospel-displaying potential.

None of this is to say that single mothers don’t repent, or that Christian men should never marry a repentant single mother (I respect another man’s personal decision on this).  But what Parkison and Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary are doing here is cruel to all involved.  It is cruel to single mothers for encouraging them to count their past sin as a gift to their future husband, instead of helping them see that while our sins are forgiven in Christ, the temporal consequences of our sins remains.  Instead of encouraging humility regarding their past sins, he encourages them to see themselves as a more attractive prospect as a Christian wife.  It is cruel to the Christian men reading as well, because it teaches them to deny the sins of women and therefore sets them and their families up for even more misery.

Lastly, the whole perspective betrays a contempt for Christian married fathers, especially the Christian men who marry repentant single mothers with full understanding of what they are taking on.  Instead of treating these men with respect, Parkison dismisses their graciousness by pretending it wasn’t gracious at all!  Parkison is stealing other men’s graciousness for himself.

H/T Okrahead

See Also:

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Disrespecting Respectability, Finding a Spouse, Marriage, Midwestern Seminary, The only real man in the room, Traditional Conservatives, Turning a blind eye. Bookmark the permalink.

244 Responses to No respect for men who marry single mothers.

  1. Nathan Bruno says:

    Most of those children already have fathers – invisible men that Sam Parkison pretends does not exist and glibly imagines would not be third parties in the step-parent arrangement. He sticks his nose in another family’s business, he is liable to have it cut off by a buzz saw.

  2. Lexet Blog says:

    And it ignores all scripture that warns men about what type of woman to marry.

    It denies that there are consequences for our actions.

    It literally makes the man a Christ figure and idol, and creates a legalistic system where the man must work to demonstrate his holiness.

    It’s a complete perversion.

  3. Nick Mgtow says:

    Are you not entertained?

    Spain , in the name of equality, combines boys and girls basketball teams championship.

    https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/03/13/brilliant-spain-combines-boys-girls-basketball-leagues/

  4. Nick Mgtow says:

    Lexet: those men are like Maury. They know the women are whores, but, if they call them whores, they lose their target market and material to work on at the same time.

    They need to pay them on the back both, Maury and the pastors, because that way they’re sure they’ll keep coming to them, guilt free.

  5. squid_hunt says:

    @Nathan

    Most of those children already have fathers – invisible men that Sam Parkison pretends does not exist and glibly imagines would not be third parties in the step-parent arrangement.

    Thank you. I was trying to think how to word that clearly. She has already joined to another man.
    When Dinah fornicated in Genesis, the Bible said she was defiled. She never married, never had children. It is perverted for another man to join to her while that man is still living. The Bible says those caught fornicating are to marry and he’s never allowed to divorce her.

  6. Damn Crackers says:

    Every welfare queen a Madonna.

  7. MattyIce says:

    “Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God”

    Pedal your blaspheme somewhere else Satan.

  8. dpmonahan says:

    Preacher watched Daddy’s Home and decided he would rather be Will Farrel than Mark Wahlberg.

  9. wodansthane says:

    ” Lastly, the whole perspective betrays a contempt for Christian married fathers, especially the Christian men who marry the repentant single mothers with full understanding of what they are taking on. Instead of treating these men with respect, Parkinson dismisses their graciousness by pretending it isn’t gracious at all! Parkinson is stealing other men’s graciousness for himself.”

    OK, if I understand things correctly, we shouldn’t be surprised by any of this. One of the things that feminists hate the most is showing gratitude to men, especially in situations where men are, in fact, rescuing them from the consequences of their own poor decisions. And by his own words we can see that Parkinson is a devout feminist.

  10. Charles B says:

    @Wodansthane, correct. Because gratitude properly recognized places a burden upon the grateful. It constrains them. And boy howdy do feminists of all stripes hate that.

  11. Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a wife.

    I could not agree more.
    So please stop devoting my offer plate checks and my state and federal income tax dollars (what belongs to Caesar) to her and the church-sanctioned fruits of her unilateral reproductive authority and rights.

    I don’t deserve her.
    And neither do any of the other men I know in society, nor any of their sons.

    In fact, thank you for reminding me why I don’t tithe. And neither should anyone else anymore.

  12. sipcode says:

    Just another shepherd that God is angry at. They know nothing of the wrath of God, nor care.

  13. The Question says:

    I want to comment, but else is there to say?

    Mark my words: One day these same “men” will write essays castigating Christian men for not dating and marrying trans-gendered women. Mark my words.

  14. Anonymous Reader says:

    wodansthane
    understand things correctly, we shouldn’t be surprised by any of this. One of the things that feminists women hate the most is showing gratitude to men, especially in situations where men are, in fact, rescuing them from the consequences of their own poor decisions.

    Fixed that for ya. Yeah, there are exceptions. They tend to be quite few, and thus prove the rule.

    With regard to the OP, it’s just another turn of the screw, tightening the vise around churchgoing men. The usual White Knighting for women’s bad behavior to actually be something else. Parkinson can be summed up: “ManUP! Marry those sluts!”

    PS: isn’t there some quote in the Bible somewhere about people who call good evil, and who call evil good? Just asking.

  15. NotaBene says:

    *Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a wife.*

    Nice! One of my fun feminism checks is switching out gender, and either laughing at the absurdity of it or imagining the outrage it would generate:

    *Single Christian dads are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a husband.*

  16. Frank K says:

    Spain , in the name of equality, combines boys and girls basketball teams championship.

    This will indeed destroy women’s sports, which is fine with me.

  17. Opus says:

    Whatever the merits of the single unwed mother (and I have never found any merit therein) there are a number of problems involved in marrying one:

    Firstly, the husband will not be as gone as the woman claims.
    Secondly, although the taboo on Homosexuality will prevent any inappropriate behaviour with the young males there is no taboo – the incest taboo – with the young females.
    Thirdly, you will sooner or later hear words to the effect such as ‘you cant make me do that you are not my Father’.
    Fourthly, you will soon discover that the new wife treats you as less than the children – a sort of unwanted guest.

    I will add that when I was growing up I was never warned about avoiding such women and so being thirsty I dated a few. My parents omission can be put down to the fact that single motherhood was rare and such a woman was in their generation often a widow and thus husband gone through no fault of the woman given a pass. The last woman I dated – i had seen her a few times in company – on our first date produced a photo of someone whom she explained was her son. That was both our first and our last date, somewhat to her disappointment. I will also add so as to gain a flavour of how far we have fallen that my Father told me that when he was young he and his friends knew a young woman who was illegitimate and he explained neither he nor his friends would take her seriously as a future wife – i would suggest that marrying a woman of divorced parents is also a risk a bit too far.

  18. Frank K says:

    Mark my words: One day these same “men” will write essays castigating Christian men for not dating and marrying trans-gendered women. Mark my words.

    There is little doubt that this will happen someday. Why not? There is that tatted “Lutheran” pastorette who is fashioning a golden vagina out of molten purity rings. And there is a “Presbyterian” church in my town that proudly flies the rainbow flag out in front, right next to the Stars and Stripes (which has become a defacto proxy for the rainbow flag). That our embassies and consulates fly the rainbow flag during “pride month” tells you all you need to know about just how conservative the President is.

  19. ““At these ages (16-18), putting them together is crazy, the differences is 50 points on average,” explains Victor Mut, coach of CB Benimaclet, one of those affected. The team, totally female has lost the illusion for basketball. “It is an absolute disappointment. I feel great impotence and anger because almost all the matches against boys are closed within minutes (when the difference is more than 40 points). As much as we work and train, it is frustrating,” explains Elena Cardo, a member of CB Benimaclet.”

  20. Anonymous Reader says:

    Searching around I do not see any evidence that MTS or Parkinson have walked any of that essay back since 2016, therefore it is safe to assume he / they still stand behind it. The usual squid ink of “Oh, that’s old news” or “you misread them” won’t work.

  21. Oscar says:

    @ Nick Mgtow says:
    March 13, 2019 at 11:44 am

    In the same vein of “equality,” some genius in Spain decided it’d be smart to combine boys and girls junior basketball leagues. 16-18 year old male and female teams ended up competing directly against each other and the results were probably even worst than expected.

    Why would anyone expect poor results? What ever happened to “anything you can do, I can do better”?

  22. Frank K says:

    Thirdly, you will sooner or later hear words to the effect such as ‘you cant make me do that you are not my Father’.

    I have heard so many horror stories of men I know of who experience this and other related horrors. One that is especially cringe worthy is when dead beat bio-dad gets to walk his princess bio dad, while the cuck who paid all her bills is supposed to be happy about.

    Seriously, you’re asking for trouble if you marry a single mother. A distant male relative is going to marry one (she already has two children from two different men). I have declined the wedding invitation, as my presence implies that I approve.

  23. Frank K says:

    As much as we work and train, it is frustrating,” explains Elena Cardo, a member of CB Benimaclet

    This deluded girl thought that they had a chance. Someone forgot to tell her that males are faster, taller and stronger and that no amount of working and training will overcome that.

  24. vfm7916 says:

    Heartiste’s latest post has a delightful image that sums up this article in one image…

  25. vfm7916 says:

    Excuse me, this one: (Don’t click if game and biological studies offend you)

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2019/03/12/skank-slatism-takes-a-mortal-blow/

  26. stickdude90 says:

    Someone forgot to tell her that males are faster, taller and stronger and that no amount of working and training will overcome that.

    Biology is a social construct.

  27. Junkyard Dawg says:

    As Opus says above, you will have to deal with her kid(s) and her relationship with them, and her elevation of them higher than your relationship between you and her. (This comes out when you object to the free pass she gives to her kid’s constant nasty behavior and she tells you that you’re “being mean” and that you hate the kid.) It is then that you realize that you have responsibility but no authority. My response has been to utterly disengage from the kid, which has brought a measure of relief.

    The pastor being referred to is talking about how worthy such a woman is, but is not dealing with the kids, the ex and the family dynamics involved. There may be some of these situations that are better than others, just telling you what it looks like from here.

  28. OKRickety says:

    My big question is “Did you personally marry a single mother?” I’d be greatly surprised if he did. (Note: I

    “My personal views, for example, are considered by most to be very strict, so the single moms I have in mind for this post are those who became single moms by virtue of unwedded pregnancies or the death of their husbands, and not by divorce.”

    I’d be interested in him explaining this position. And expanding it to situations such as a woman who was an unwed mother, then married, and later divorced.

  29. Putting a widow in the same class as a fornicator is loathsome.

  30. Scott says:

    The issue of marrying a single mom and what the husband is entitled to in that case is fairly complex when I look at it from my perspective, 13 years into this marriage with all that’s hapened in that time.

    In a sense I’ve given up on trying to write about it and discuss it in depth because I get the sense my situation, the woman I chose, the sincere repentance and all the rest of it constitutes an extreme outlier.

  31. ray says:

    ‘Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God’

    The WHAT?

    How desperate and gelded does a man — much less a supposed Christian leader — have to be to proclaim such an astonishment of blasphemy as that? And be proud of it?

    I mean, why not just make single mothers the new God? Seeings how moms are equivalent to CHRIST in purity? Every time I read about one of these doods here, a new low is established. It’s like the Grovel Olympics. Even a snake doesn’t hunker the dirt that deep.

    ‘which is more than you deserve in a wife.’

    Sight unseen. No information required on the relative spiritual development of the male or female in question. Parkinson — like his brethren by the legions — just KNOWS that no male could ever be good enough for those creatures who are equivalent to Christ in purity!

    Some third-rate loser like YOU doesn’t even DESERVE a wife! But Parkey and the Grrls are gonna try and browbeat you into accepting one anyways. Just as long as you know ahead of time that she — having already boinked God knows how many other males — rivals God Himself in her purity. Oh, and that no matter how model a husband you become, no matter how righteous, why, your wife will always be more than you deserve. Every day, bay bay.

    The resentment and sense of self-inferiority just drips off their statements. They didn’t manage to become men, so the best they can do is ruin it for you. Poison the cake before you and your wife — I mean the idol of purity — even cut it.

    Well anyway good luck dragging this outrage in front of King Jeshua. Can’t wait to see that.

  32. Lost Patrol says:

    It is cruel to single mothers for encouraging them to count their past sin as a gift to their future husband, instead of helping them see that while our sins are forgiven in Christ, the temporal consequences of our sins remains. Instead of encouraging humility regarding their past sins, he encourages them to see themselves as a more attractive prospect as a Christian wife.

    I haven’t tracked this down church by church, but just by word of mouth over the last couple of years I believe quite a few churches now have a ministry specifically for these single mothers. It’s a kind of sub-specialty that warrants its own support group led by the Pastor’s wife or somebody along those lines.

    What Dalrock has written undercuts the class outline for when they meet.

    In practical terms most churches also accord them the same types of care and services from parishioners that used to be reserved for actual widows and their children. As noted above by Nathan Bruno there is usually a father and maybe one time husband still living but he may as well be dead. Even the men that do not hold any particular candle for single moms nevertheless often pitch in because they don’t like to see the youngsters out there flapping without some male oversight to their circumstances.

    This promises to be a growth industry. Buy stock early.

  33. 7817 says:

    None of this is to say that single mothers don’t repent, or that Christian men should never marry a repentant single mother (I respect another man’s personal decision on this).

    Right, and to paint marriage to a single mother as an act of greater virtue, (as he does here: such a marriage also has the potential of reflecting the gospel to an even greater degree
    ) than marriage to a virgin is just perverse.

  34. Scott says:

    1. I do not consider my experience with mate selection in my 30s after my own divorce to be particularly unique though.

    2. I suspect that somewhere around 90 percent of the people I associate with even now, Christian church goers were not vigins when they got married nor were they on their first sec partner.

    3. I was participating in the christo-American normative rom-com informed process of finding my “soul mate.” This process includes going on three dates and having sex on the third date, “seeing where it goes,” breaking up and continuing these steps until the soul mate reveals herself. You will just “know it.”

    In my case it worked out and THEN I found the red pill. Sometimes it seems like there is absolutely nothing to learn from it.

    4. Single moms, single dads, divorcees, etc are a totally normal part of that journey.

  35. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Opus: The last woman I dated – i had seen her a few times in company – on our first date produced a photo of someone whom she explained was her son. That was both our first and our last date,

    Long ago, I went on a first time date with a woman I met online. She neglected to tell me that she had a son (four or five years old). She mentioned it over dinner. I don’t date single moms, and wouldn’t have asked her out had I known.

    She began telling me about her son’s lousy father, who she claimed didn’t want anything to do with their son. She wasn’t ever married to the boy’s father, or to anyone else.

    She said that every day, she had to think up some new place to take her son. The zoo, a museum, whatever. Because every day, he demanded to know, “Where are we going today?”

    Once, her young son (of four or five) pulled a knife on her, threatening to kill her. She said to him, “Then you’ll be very sad, because you won’t have a mommy.”

    Later, during dinner, she asked me if I wanted kids.

    “No,” I bluntly replied. I was in my late 40s at the time.

    “That’s pretty cold,” she said.

    She was in her late 30s. A former singer in a (none too famous) rock band, now studying acting. The boy’s father was a former member of the band.

  36. Bruce says:

    Quote from Darwin Catholic:

    https://darwincatholic.blogspot.com/2018/12/purity-culture-and-chastity.html

    “Perhaps it’s easier if we think for a moment about sins which it remains fashionable to consider always and everywhere wrong.
    Is it important for a man to maintain the purity of never having beaten his wife? Are we over-emphasizing the important of sinlessness and discouraging the sinners if we say that a man should never, ever, haul off and smack the woman he loves, no matter how bitter their disagreements? Are we unfairly smearing men who’ve beaten just a few women if we suggest that women should consider a man who has beaten other women permanently suspect? Are we suggesting that there’s no forgiveness and thus writing such men off forever?
    Of course, I would hope we all agree that it is not at all unreasonable to emphasize not just that guys should overall, most of the time, especially once they settle down, avoid hitting women too much, but rather that they never, ever hit women, that they not do it even the first time.”

    If a woman should consider a former woman beater suspect then a man should consider a former slut suspect.

  37. Novaseeker says:

    This will indeed destroy women’s sports, which is fine with me.

    I think the trans will do that first — far more of them infiltrating girls/womens sports than there are male v female matches. The trans will sideline genetic women from athletic championship slots, and they’re untouchable because they are at the top of the grievance pyramid

  38. @7817

    Right, and to paint marriage to a single mother as an act of greater virtue, (as he does here: such a marriage also has the potential of reflecting the gospel to an even greater degree
    ) than marriage to a virgin is just perverse.

    Parkinson is correct that it is more virtuous for a man to do it, and it does present a better chance to show the gospel in many cases. He just completely dumps that into a dumpster, douses it with lighter fluid and maniacally sets it ablaze by aggressively supporting the idea that it’s for a reason other than the man sacrificially loving a woman despite him having good reason to consider overlooking her.

  39. The Question says:

    If you understand the intended reader of that piece was not single men but single mothers, then it suddenly makes sense in some warped way. No one in their right mind could possibly think that such rhetoric will convince or persuade any men to do what it says. He is essentially virtue signalling to show how virtuous he is.

    I think that is the issue that we struggle with. We take these posts are literal face value, rather than see them as displays of virtue. The author doesn’t care if a single man reads his piece and is persuaded to marry some single mother he would have otherwise written off. It’s his public display of piety as defined by the feminine imperative.

    He is the appeasing the goddesses, and considering that he says single mothers are as sinless as Christ, I’m not being hyperbolic or exaggerating at all.

  40. Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    “Rejoice not, O Israel! Exult not like the peoples; for you have played the whore, forsaking your God. You have loved a prostitute’s wages on all threshing floors.”
    ‭‭Hosea‬ ‭9:1‬ ‭ESV‬‬

    So there is that.

  41. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    If you understand the intended reader of that piece was not single men but single mothers, then it suddenly makes sense in some warped way.

    True. It’s one of those lies that the world tells women. That women tell themselves. Others include:

    * Older women make better first time wives than do younger women. Older women know who they are and what they want. They are wiser. More stable and reliable. More mature. Man boys prefer silly 20-year-olds. Real men appreciate 40-year-olds.

    * The more past lovers a woman has had, the luckier the man who marries her. Like any skill, sex improves with diverse experience. Who’s more likely to win a race? A seasoned pro who’s raced for many years across all manner of track and terrain? Or a beginner who’s never driven before?

    * A single mom brings a bonus to marriage. Because, hey, “instant family.”

  42. *Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a wife.*
    If the gospel works for them that way, doesn’t it work for me that way? And put us on equal footing? What is he driving at here?

  43. Pingback: No respect for men who marry. | Reaction Times

  44. 7817 says:

    Parkinson is correct that it is more virtuous for a man to do it, and it does present a better chance to show the gospel in many cases.

    Can you show your work here?

  45. Charles B says:

    @greenmantleboyos, obviously you need to be a sinner first. Following his logic, if you beat some women first and then go to church, you are as pure as the Alpha and Omega himself.

  46. @Charles B., see? That’s the evangelical bubble thing going on that I have never been at home in.

  47. Frank K says:

    True. It’s one of those lies that the world tells women. That women tell themselves.

    The sad thing is that a lot of thirsty chumps also buy into these lies.

  48. Original Laura says:

    OKRickety quotes Pastor Parkison (I think) as saying:

    “My personal views, for example, are considered by most to be very strict, so the single moms I have in mind for this post are those who became single moms by virtue of unwedded pregnancies or the death of their husbands, and not by divorce.”

    I would love to see statistics on whether a marriage to an unwed mother is as likely to last as a marriage to a divorced mother. My impression from the unwed mothers that I have known is that they are (1) bad with money; (2) unable to defer gratification; (3) unable to work steadily toward long-term goals. Since the ability to manage money and defer gratification are positively correlated with having a lasting marriage, these women are very high risk from the start. In addition, unwed mothers may agree that premarital sex is a sin, but because they did not abort their child, they generally feel as though they are “more moral than most people.” Furthermore, the decision to keep an out-of-wedlock child is nearly always a fairly conscious decision to mooch off of other people, from the taxpayers who provide welfare, to the maternal grandparents who supply endless free childcare and pay for clothing, toys, and extracurricular activities. These are not strong candidates for marriage.

    At least with divorced women, SOME of them have been dumped against their will, and SOME of them have initiated a divorce for what most people would consider a just cause. Most of them at least started off the marriage with an intention to make it work. In contrast, the unwed mother who decides to keep her baby often seems to live in a fantasy world where her standard of living and chances for a happy marriage and fulfilled life will not be negatively impacted by the presence of an illegitimate child.

    A divorced woman can often be realistic about the step-dad’s treatment of her child, because she has seen the bio-dad in action with the kid. An unwed mother compares the step-dad with the step-dads of romantic comedies and TV dramas and the step-dad never compares favorably.

    In addition, ex-husbands are usually paying some level of child support, while the father of the unwed mother’s child may not even be identified. The unwed mother will be badgering her new husband from Day One to adopt her child, which is seldom in the husband’s best interests.

    Most divorced women with children may be a bad bet for marital happiness, but unwed mothers rarely have anything positive to offer.

  49. Mitch says:

    I have a friend who married a woman with four children by a previous husband. I praised him for his courage and sacrifice for being willing to take on this challenge. Perhaps I should now call him and take it all back. He clearly didn’t deserve someone as pure as the sinless Son of God (and what is he, exactly? The spawn of Satan?). I should call him while he is at Costco buying diapers and palettes full of Ramen noodles and tell him his grocery budget and sexless life are “brimming with gospel-displaying potential.”

  50. thedeti says:

    @ Red Pill Latecomer:

    * Older women make better first time wives than do younger women. Older women know who they are and what they want. They are wiser. More stable and reliable. More mature. Man boys prefer silly 20-year-olds. Real men appreciate 40-year-olds.

    * The more past lovers a woman has had, the luckier the man who marries her. Like any skill, sex improves with diverse experience. Who’s more likely to win a race? A seasoned pro who’s raced for many years across all manner of track and terrain? Or a beginner who’s never driven before?

    * A single mom brings a bonus to marriage. Because, hey, “instant family.”

    And, “A single mom is as pure and sinless as the Son of God.”

    These are exactly the lies that Dalrock has exposed as utterly cruel. It is the height of cruelty to tell women lies like this. Because the lies suggest that life will work out very differently than it actually does.

    A woman in her 30s marrying for the first time is almost always settling hard, and isn’t marrying nearly as well as she could have had she married younger. She might be more stable and reliable, but she is marrying a man she’s probably not sexually attracted to. She’s marrying for the wrong reasons.

    A promiscuous woman who then marries doesn’t benefit from all that experience. Most of the time, promiscuous women aren’t all that good at sex because they’ve never really had to be – it’s not all that difficult to lie on your back. It just makes them increasingly jaded and cynical. They don’t learn about sex as much as they learn how to use men and how to avoid being used by men.

    What “skills” does the promiscuous woman really bring to a marriage? Self protection. Manipulation. How to lie convincingly. How to shame, harangue and browbeat a man into doing what she wants. Using sex as a tool, a means to an end, whether as sword for attack, shield for protection, or tool for manipulation. How to cover up/compensate for the underlying causes of her promiscuity, which is usually some combination of a personality disorder, depression, a chemical imbalance, and daddy issues.

    The truth is that a single mom drastically reduces her sexual market value. She is now encumbered with a child who must be cared for, housed, fed, educated, disciplined, trained and raised. These tasks consume enormous amounts of time, capital, effort, resources, and money. The truth is not that the single mom offers much; but rather that she requires much. The truth is that what she requires so outweighs what she can offer, such that the return on investment makes no sense.

    These people are being unimaginably cruel to single mothers and promiscuous women.

  51. JRob says:

    Actual conversation, last Sunday school I taught years ago. It was basically me leading a Clam Party, so, going unsaid, everything discussed on this blog was there. In spades.

    Chopped Off Dyed hair tatted Strong Independent Grrl 23-year-old (CODSIG), unwed:
    “Hey! I got a Reformed study Bible and a Strong’s Concordance like you said.”

    Me: That’s great.

    CODSIG: Now I can look for God’s will for my life.

    Me: It’s all in there.

    CODSIG: Now that I’m pregnant I’ll need to know. I had a manic moment. My Mom wants me to get married and have a family but I don’t want to. I’m happy with my animals.”

    The remainder of the gathering before I stopped it to give the lesson centered around the other women giving her advice where to get handouts. We’re still paying for this idiot.

  52. seventiesjason says:

    There are some single moms in church who “understand” their past mistakes, have truly with heartfelt shame, and repentance accepted their sin, their role and past mistakes. Yes, I will concede and agree that this is not common….but I have witnessed in my short ten year Christian walk three women that have demonstrated this. I actually tried to date one……..let’s not go there……but she did find and marry a man in Christ, and in the church. Not me sadly.

    Many women have written me off because of my past drug use and abuse. I have repented. I turned away and rebuilt my life, my integrity and reputation……and this still isn’t “good enough” for most. I have never relapsed.

    Waiting for a sermon to women about men like me…….not counting on that.

    Most men Christian or not are lucky enough to marry that woman who is a virgin past the age of 15 today.

  53. thedeti says:

    This is Sam Parkison.

    I rest my case.

  54. OKRickety says:

    Samuel Parkison said: “No, I didn’t marry a single Christian mother.”

    Talk is cheap. But, for what it’s worth, she does have a ring in her nose in the family photo (on Twitter?).

  55. tteclod says:

    Sometimes I wish Paul had written letters to our modern churches. Too often his letters lack explicit instructions to address these “modern” challenges around which modern preachers dance.

    Don’t you wish he addressed, like he did with widows, the “single mother” of every category.
    -The teen mom raised outside Christian fellowship, who later accepted Christ
    -The 20’s-30’s mom raised outside Christian fellowship, who later accepted Christ
    -The divorced mom whose husband abandoned her
    -The divorced mom,who divorced her husband
    -The “Christian” mom who refuses to marry the willing father of her child
    -The “Christian” mom whose “Christian” beau refuses to marry her

    I could go on-and-on-and-on, but I think you get the picture. I feel that this is a blind(ed) spot right now where each of us has tentative answers but none of us are allowed to reach a consensus because agreement about how to handle such circumstances would require women (and men) to act righteously.

    @Scott – I see your dilemma: how does a man correct a fait accompli? Occasionally, no harm, no foul applies: a man who abandons his wife de facto divorces her and frees her to wed again, as best I can interpret scripture; one could argue the same for fornication. A man who abandons his children likewise gets no claim on them. But the “single mother” often isn’t as single as she claims. For my part, my wife wasn’t “pure” when I met her, but we were both still very young, and her “notches” (if she can be believed) were all “serious” relationships and not numerous, so there’s that. Also, no kids – which makes a BIG difference. Like you, I red-pilled later, but I wasn’t far off the narrow path – I’ve since left Christianity and only keep tabs because my wife is Christian, the kids attend church with her, and the country is “Christian,” so it pays to be aware. From this non-Christian vantage, I’m increasingly perplexed by the inability of Christians to establish and maintain standards for behavior. Stuff Dalrock links tends to confirm my suspicions that Christianity (as we know it) is a lost cause in what’s left of America, but you guys tend to give me hope something can rise from the ashes.

  56. feministhater says:

    The answer is no. They can all marry their personal Jesus.

  57. Nick Mgtow says:

    Oscar says:
    March 13, 2019 at 12:48 pm

    ” What ever happened to “anything you can do, I can do better”?

    With women, it’s make believe, not make. You watch anything that comes from Hollywood, a 5ft5 woman can beat up a duo of 6 ft security men, and everyone believes that.

  58. okrahead says:

    The statement that the single mother is as pure as Christ, and that “you” don’t deserve her…
    Parkison misunderstands several things theologically here.
    1) Imputed righteousness. Even if you are of the Reformed or Calvinist churches, the traditional understanding of imputed righteousness does not mean that you are literally as pure as Christ; rather it means that God by grace overlooks your sin and sees Christ’s righteousness instead of your sin. In otherwise, you are still impure and unworthy, but God in His mercy overlooks this as a result of Christ’s sacrifice. Now, as I am not a Calvinist it’s not big issue to me, but it’s interesting that a “serious” SBC theologian writing for a prestigious seminary does not understand this.

  59. okrahead says:

    Parkison’s mistakes ctd.
    2) Parkison does not understand “deserve” in the context of his own usage. It is true I do not deserve any good thing that God blesses me with, and that I should always admit and acknowledge this. This includes not deserving a good wife should God bless me with such. This, however, deals only in what I deserve from God. With my fellow men I am on an equal footing, and deserve all manner of things. If Cane asks me to fix his car, and offers me money to do so, then I deserve (from Cane) the agreed payment if and when I fix his car. As to the money itself, and whatever good things I may purchase with it, they are of course gifts from God which I do not deserve. Hence a good wife may indeed be a blessing from God which I do not deserve from Him; but I absolutely deserve to have any woman I marry be a good wife (it’s what my wife owes me). I Cor. 7 correctly identifies this as a debt I am owed if married.

  60. okrahead says:

    3) Throughout his article Parkison separates virginity from purity for the unmarried. Specifically, he repeatedly asserts that unmarried women may be both sexually active and sexually pure. Per Hebrews 13, marriage is pure and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. Apparently this scripture is absent from Parkison’s Bible. He also flatly asserts (without scriptural reference) that teaching virginity prior to marriage is unbiblical, which is itself antithetical to Hebrews 13. I get the idea that Parkison is following the teachings of that woman Jezebel mentioned in Rev. 2:20

  61. Christopher Conrad Nystrom says:

    I hope by “single Christian moms” he means widows, because if he is talking about divorced women that goes explicitly against the words of Jesus in Luke 16:18:

    “…and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

  62. Anonymous Reader says:

    Deti
    These are exactly the lies that Dalrock has exposed as utterly cruel.

    Yes. Plus traditional conservative celebrity pastors don’t want men in their churches reading Dalrock. One wonders why?

    Why do so many of these Traditional Conservatives want to hide ugly facts from men, especially single men, in their churches?

    Cui Bono?

  63. Anonymous Reader says:

    seventiesjason
    There are some single moms in church who “understand” their past mistakes, have truly with heartfelt shame, and repentance accepted their sin, their role and past mistakes.

    I have known a couple also. One went through one of the Christian websites and eventually found a man to marry, in a different state, whose wife had frivorced him. [Please spare us the theology, ya’ll know who you are]. I ran into them – her, him, her child, his child, their child – right around Christmas last year and everything looked good. Not just in words, but in nonverbal communications between them and her father, etc.

    A lot of babymommas have way too much “go-grrl” pride to admit anything. So they get nothing.

  64. vfm7916 says:

    @thedeti

    Dat retweet:

    ““The biblical view declares both individual conversion and social justice…indispensable. The Bible calls for personal holiness and for sweeping societal changes; it refuses to substitute private religion for social responsibility.”

    By their retweets ye shall know them… SJW’s.

  65. Paul says:

    What Sam and a large part of the churches are missing, is the fact that having sex unites man and woman into a one-flesh union. Next to sinning against the Holy Spirit, sexual sin is treated most grave in the NT, as it is a sin carried in your body. It’s remarkable how often the NT warns against sexual sin, compared to the ease with which it is treated in most modern churches.

    Being a ‘single mother’ is just a lie. EVERYONE has ONE biological father and ONE biological mother. Sexual union created a one-flesh union. ‘Single mothers’ are depriving their children of living with their biological fathers. That should not be celebrated, but shamed instead.

    I can only guess that the churches needs to validate ‘single mothers’ to validate remarriage after (no fault) divorce, which is a true epidemic in the church.

    To see the enormous value placed upon both virginity and the one-flesh union, consider that the penalty for adultery in the OT was death. Next to being a penalty, death effectively terminates the one-flesh union, thereby upholding the value of the one-flesh unions that were honored in marriage. Furthermore, if people had sex before marriage, they were obliged to marry, and could NEVER EVER divorce.

    “However, if a man meets a girl who isn’t engaged to be married, and he seizes her, rapes her, and is later found out, then the man who raped her must give 50 shekels of silver to the girl’s father. Furthermore, he must marry her. Because he violated her, he is to not divorce her as long as he lives.” Deut 22

    (compare with the previous verse where the “rapist” is killed, to understand that this assumes a certain level of consent of the girl.)

  66. galloper6 says:

    What a crock! I have never heard something so off the chart bogus from the pulpit ever. The sheer gall of this statement is unbelievable!
    I wonder if Parkinson’s marriage matches this “devine” pattern?
    Unbelievable! Unbelievable!

  67. galloper6 says:

    What next; the blessing of cuckoldry? Will this pulpit clown suggest or demand husband send out their wives to get pregnant from other men?
    I am still shocked from the level of nonsense of this. Within living memory this sermon would have gotten him dragged off to the rubber room.

  68. Warthog says:

    I dated a “repentant” pastor’s daughter for about 5 months once. Repentant because she had slept all around the campus of the college right next to her father’s church when she was 18/19 until she got knocked up. Parents adopted the baby. She continued the lifestyle, shacked up with an abusive boyfriend,and aborted his child when she got pregnant. Then decided to fly straight, when I met her.

    Well, let’s just say she didn’t fly straight when I met her either. I dumped her when I realized I would never have any certainty that my her children were my own. Hosea was indeed a very very great man, better than me, that’s for sure.

    That experience taught me that there is a reason that the Bible puts a premium on virgin women.

  69. stickdude90 says:

    @Christopher Conrad Nystrom:

    I hope by “single Christian moms” he means widows, because if he is talking about divorced women that goes explicitly against the words of Jesus in Luke 16:18:

    “…and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

    To his (very small) credit, he does exclude divorced women – while calling his views “very strict”:

    My personal views, for example, are considered by most to be very strict, so the single moms I have in mind for this post are those who became single moms by virtue of unwedded pregnancies or the death of their husbands, and not by divorce.

  70. Jay Fink says:

    I miss the days when the offspring of unwed mothers were called bastards. Today many people throw around the word bastard as a general insult having no idea what it means.

  71. Warthog says:

    The proper way to deal with harlots is to kill them in front of their father’s house.

  72. Paul says:

    the single moms I have in mind for this post are those who became single moms by virtue of unwedded pregnancies

    You don’t become a ‘single mom’ by an unwedded pregnancy, but by failing to marry the father, or by divorcing him.

  73. Bee says:

    There are many SIGNIFICANT challenges that a man and his marriage will encounter if he marry’s a single mom. This article does not bother to address these serious pitfalls. To encourage men to marry single mom’s without discussing these serious issues is naive and HARMFUL.

    1. Chances are extremely high that the biological father will be more Alpha than the blue pill church guy that commits to the single mom. How do we solve the Alpha Widow attitudes in the mom’s mind and body?
    2. Is stepdad allowed to be involved in disciplining the step kid/s?
    3. Is stepdad allowed to take the lead in disciplining the step kid/s?
    4. Will mom put stepdad first as his helpmeet or will she always be focused on her kids?
    5. Does mom want to have any more kids?
    6. Is mom able to have any more kids?
    7. Is bio-dad nearby? Is he very involved?
    8. Has mom truly repented and expressed a Godly sorrow for what she has done? Or, was it just a mistake? Was she just young and foolish?
    9. Has she rejected marriage with bio-dad for the wrong reasons?
    10. If she is a divorced mom, was her divorce for valid Christian reasons? Has she pursued reconciliation with her ex?
    11. Does she have unresolved bitterness towards bio-dad or her ex?

    If a pastor, minister, priest, marriage counselor does not admit that these are serious issues that need dealt with before marriage, then you can not rely on them to give you good advice about going ahead with such a marriage.

    This is the second Christian article on this topic I have seen. Neither article discusses the deep pitfalls. I did several searches for the other article but did not locate it.

  74. Novaseeker says:

    He’s trying to fix a problem that generally either fixes itself or, in the cases where it doesn’t, isn’t fixable — namely, what do you do with all the babymommas in the church?

    Well, the babymommas who are hot generally do get married, because enough men prioritize hotness over everything else that they will have suitors and will get married regardless of the other risks they present … because hot. That “problem” (if you define the problem as unmarried babymommas) fixes itself, therefore, if the subject is hot.

    For the babymommas who are not that hot, and still present the rest of the risks that a babymomma presents, well that problem is hard to fix inside the church (and often outside of it as well). A babymomma presents risks that make her less attractive for marriage than average, and no preacher will change that with his words. If she can’t counterbalance those risks with pure, raw attraction (hotness, femininity, etc.), she won’t have a long list of suitors for marriage … she may find dates, but interest in marriage will be far rarer. Trying to fix this with preaching won’t move the needle at all, because people only marry when they are attracted enough to take on the risks — since these women present a lot of additional, incremental risk, if strong attraction isn’t there, the pro forma doesn’t pencil for marriage, simply put.

  75. Anonymous Reader says:

    Novaseeker
    A babymomma presents risks that make her less attractive for marriage than average, and no preacher will change that with his words. If she can’t counterbalance those risks with pure, raw attraction (hotness, femininity, etc.), she won’t have a long list of suitors for marriage … she may find dates, but interest in marriage will be far rarer

    Pretty much. The case I described above involved a reasonably cute church-going girl with a very ineffectual Beta father. She was never hot. The man she ultimately married is blue-collar and overweight. But as far as I can tell, she was ready to do anything … even submit…to get married.

    She made up for lack of hotness with her own sweetness and submission, as far as I can tell.

    What churchmen like Parkinson do is build up babymommas in their own eyes, on top of all the YouGoGrrl they get from the rest of society. Therefore guess what? No man is ever going to be good enough for them to give up the EBT, the Section 8 housing, and of course all the help from a church. Actually marrying a real man would involve sacrificing all of that stuff plus having to sorta kinda submit.

    It’s almost as though some preachers would rather have aging bad girls “married” to their church, rather than married to a man….

  76. Anon says:

    Parkison calls Christian men’s preferences in this regard vanity, and repeats the charge three times:

    It is always three times with these cuckservatives.

    Just like when other pastorbators praise the Church fatties as being ‘beautiful, beautiful, beautiful) three times.

    This is a damning admission of their own complete lack of genuine faith.

  77. PokeSalad says:

    No man is ever going to be good enough for them to give up the EBT, the Section 8 housing, and of course all the help from a church. Actually marrying a real man would involve sacrificing all of that stuff plus having to sorta kinda submit.

    Do you think this is also a factor in the church’s strategy? After all, babymommas are typically a drain on church resources, not a net gain…

  78. Jack Russell says:

    Man up and marry this one. She’s available and has a child to. Had posted earlier from another site, but it used a word which sent it to the spam box.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6789343/Self-confessed-sex-addict-30-whos-slept-200-men-goes-celibate-mother.html

  79. Anon says:

    Instead of treating these men with respect, Parkinson dismisses their graciousness by pretending it wasn’t gracious at all!

    Well, in the case of Jim Gay-ratty, Parkinson is actually correct. Jim-Gayratty married a single mother, and then made an entire video asserting that men who do this are the apex of attractiveness. Gay-ratty was stunned at how little respect he got.

    Gay-ratty and Parkinson should be introduced to each other.

  80. Anonymous Reader says:

    Do you think this is also a factor in the church’s strategy?

    I doubt most people in churches are that Machiavellian, but I have personally seen members of the Church of Nice go through some extensive rationalizations while they enabled babymommas.

    After all, babymommas are typically a drain on church resources, not a net gain…

    They are a drain on financial resources, but they do provide some virtue-signalling points for those people who work with them.

    Plus it seems to come down to “but, but, what about the children?” every time.

    Rant: if a woman walked into a church service holding a baby / toddler and a gun, screaming “GIVE ME MONEY OR THE KID DIES!” most churchgoers would immediately recognize the hostage situation and try to find a way to get the kid away from the woman. However if the same woman is pregnant and “thinking” about an abortion, or if the same woman has a toddler and just can’t seem to quite stop having men over to her Section 8 housing unit from time to time, well, I mean, really! Can’t actually punish the woman because what about the child(ren). So while the obvious hostage situation is obvious, the more subtle “Ooops! I’m pregnant again! Tee hee!” hostage situation is not that obvious, and so…what about the child(ren)?

    Lots of bad endings to this story. I’ve seen a couple. One involved CPS removing children from the babymomma permanently, as in “foster care / adoption”. Yeah, it got that bad.

    But the church as a group got to pat themselves on the back for their enabling with “Well…at least we tried!”, so I guess that’s that.

  81. Do you think this is also a factor in the church’s strategy? After all, babymommas are typically a drain on church resources, not a net gain…

    Usually church stewards and leaders would want to see those offering plates brimming with envelopes and bills that fold.
    EBT cards are not helpful at all for churches.
    But filling the pews with single moms and female fornicators-done-wrong fills up the church women with righteous indignation, fills the women’s bible study group with lost souls, and jacks up the nursery. It also generates opportunities for the leadership to persuade, compel and influence others to give more than they otherwise would – so that they secure their place in Valhalla, or avoid frying their souls in the everlasting Lake of Fire.
    Perhaps not a drain on the coffers at all. Perhaps a boon?

  82. Scott says:

    As I get older, it becomes easier to spot fallacious pressuposotions as presented.

    This is not to be understood as me bragging about my own flair for abstract thought. God forbid. I mean I would expect anyone over the age of fifteen to see this.

    The idea that single moms, collectively occupy a position of moral irreproachability by virtue of being in this category should be pretty foul smelling to anyone.

    To then further posit that this status proceeds from the assertion that bringing a child into the dating scene provides the potential suitor an opportunity to show how Christ like he is then reaches otherworldly and bizarre

    Especially when the cherry on top is to then show zero regard for that sacrifice.

    But let’s be honest. When dating a single mom, the end game does not change, even in church. Namely, to have sex as soon as possible.

    There are a number of pre-canned conversations that you must have in this scenario in order to provide the illusion of moral cover. But otherwise nothing is different.

    For example, the woman MUST say [something like] “I just want you to know that my son comes first so if you are going to be jealous of that, we have a problem.”

    This is of course meaningless talk but it is best to just nod and give approval of this proclamation. In fact you might even say “of course! That makes you a great mom!”

    Conversely the man MUST say “if we get really serious, I will be committing to both of you as a package deal.”

    You earn extra points if you announce this within earshot of her friends.

    But if she’s into you, she will find a way to get a sitter in order to be alone with you, according to the same rules as if she was not a mom. So all the “my kid comes first” stuff is silly. It’s qualified by the reservation that you have entered a dating relationship with each other.

    This all seems pretty self evident to me, but again, I re entered the MMP/SMP in my thirties after an 8 year marriage to find these things to be true.

  83. BillyS says:

    Too bad we don’t have a way to measure loyalty ahead of time. I would take the risk of a single mom if I knew she would be and remain loyal (unlikely I know) and even my effort for her child(ren) would be rewarded with loyalty from them. (Without needing to cut out their father assuming he was not truly a bad influence.)

    That is unlikely to happen in both cases.

    A general comment on a related issue: Adoption, especially as it is pushed by many churches, is also a minefield they do not prepare people for. I have gone through my own hell with that and it was not pretty, contrary to all the wonderful stories.

  84. Scott says:

    All of this, by the way is why I don’t assent to dating as an appropriate form of mate selection for my kids. It’s all sin covered up by formatting to make it look “romantic” or whatever.

    And I know I can’t control them.

    Been through all that with my blogging, conversations with other parents, etc. But I have a moral obligation to at least present them with other possible ways to find a spouse and encourage them and support them.

  85. Scott says:

    A general comment on a related issue: Adoption, especially as it is pushed by many churches, is also a minefield they do not prepare people for. I have gone through my own hell with that and it was not pretty, contrary to all the wonderful stories.

    In most cases the father will not consent because they can’t stomach the thought of their child’s name changing.

    This is an important data point that is contra to to the “scourge of uninterested dead-beat dads” narrative everyone “just knows” is true.

    The more likely explanation is most of those dads were divorced against their will and the child is the only evidence that the union existed at all.

  86. Warthog says:

    Over the years I have observed something I call bastard-son-syndrome in numerous Christian families I’ve met.

    There was a single mom. She meets and marries a man, who in some cases adopts the bastard, but in other cases does not or cannot but tries to be a father to him.

    In almost every single case when the bastard hits his teenage years or early twenties he turns against his adopted father either openly or passive-aggressively. In one case I saw he later repented and admitted to his adopted father that “You were Joseph to me.” But in virtually all the other cases, it does not go that way.

    There was a reason that the Law God gave to Moses prohibited a bastard from becoming a citizen until the 10th generation!

  87. locustyears says:

    Single Christian men who decide not to marry single moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a husband.

  88. Watch out Dalrock. Sam Parkinson’s minions might come after you the way Pastor Bayly’s minions just did, lol!

  89. I have to admit though, I have never once attended a church where the pastor tried to encourage the young men in the church to marry the never-married-mom. I have never seen that. Now I will admit, I think that is probably because pretty much every single church I have ever attended or have been a member is pretty much God’s waiting room (filled with nothing but old people.) I was the only young man and there were no young women. So that kind of preaching would fall on deaf ears because, well, those people were all married or all widows/widowers so it would have been pointless to preach that heresy.

  90. Anon says:

    A general comment on a related issue: Adoption, especially as it is pushed by many churches, is also a minefield they do not prepare people for. I have gone through my own hell with that and it was not pretty, contrary to all the wonderful stories.

    This was the same experience that past commenter BradA related. Adoption, which in theory should be a win-win for both the children and the adoptive parent under any logical assessment that ignores biological realities, ends up not working out for either.

    It sort of proves that there is no God, frankly…..

  91. Anon says:

    Scott,

    The more likely explanation is most of those dads were divorced against their will and the child is the only evidence that the union existed at all.

    Why do you think radical feminists are pushing for mother-authorized unilateral infanticide? Plus, cuckservatives, as expected, barely even fought back against this latest advance (such as via forcing them to answer ‘up to what age is murder acceptable?’).

  92. Spike says:

    Pr Parkison does not understand relationships. At all.

    The relationship between a mother and a child is a mammalian biological bond. It is very strong.
    The relationship of a husband to a wife and child is sociological. It is an “artificial” bond, defined by social roles, not biology. A male’s biological role finished at conception.

    If a man marries a single mother, the pair of them will always side with each other. She and she alone will be recognised by the child as the authority in the relationship. The “stepfather” will not be. Any attempt to discipline the child, to shape the child or teach the child happens only at the behest of the mother. She will not side with him against the child when the child requires discipline.

    the Stepfather is there to provide for “her little brood”. Nothing else. His task will be thankless. Should the family last to marriage, especially it is a daughter, “real dad” will give the bride away, not the man who devoted his life to raising her in complex circumstances.

    Christian men are particularly vulnerable to this type of convincing. Often naive about the nature of women and having the understanding that suffering happens in life (for the gospel, but this is a fact often not pointed out), they will sign up.

    Cruel indeed.

  93. TheOtherScott says:

    Marriage is hard enough with a virginal, putatively Christian woman as it is. Why would we encourage Christian brothers to screw up their ENTIRE lives (because marriage is for life, remember?) by selecting obviously spoiled raw materials in which to build on? Mat 7:24-27 And whatever happened to all of the extensive allusions our pastors like to make about not being unequally yoked? Would this be a sufficiently obvious case for them?

    Sheesh. A guy just can’t win nowadays. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

  94. Opus says:

    I was struck by the rightness of sixties jason’s comment above where he bemoaned the fact that his being clear of drink and drugs for a decade cuts no ice with the single female. I would imagine that were it not drink and drugs but homosexuality or paedophilia or alcoholism the result would be the same. Would the Rev. Parkison in those circumstances be encouraging his single unwed mothers to woman up and marry such a person. I rather doubt it!

    On the subject of adoption every one knows it is fake which is why so often such children later seek out if they can their natural Mother – and Father. I once dated a young lady who had been adopted and to this day i think ‘what did her good adoptive parents do to deserve such a little monster’. No matter how infuriating ones own parents may be (how long have you got?) they are ones own parents and their parents are ones grandparents and so it goes back as far as one may have records but, sad as it may be for childless couples, adopting a child merely brings a stranger into ones family and they will leave the same way – a stranger.

  95. vandicus says:

    Interestingly the Bible doesn’t seem to recommend adoption at any point(though it does encourage caring for widows and orphans). Possibly because of the innate risks making it generally a bad idea.

  96. squid_hunt says:

    @ttecloud

    Don’t you wish he addressed, like he did with widows, the “single mother” of every category.
    -The teen mom raised outside Christian fellowship, who later accepted Christ
    -The 20’s-30’s mom raised outside Christian fellowship, who later accepted Christ
    -The divorced mom whose husband abandoned her
    -The divorced mom,who divorced her husband
    -The “Christian” mom who refuses to marry the willing father of her child
    -The “Christian” mom whose “Christian” beau refuses to marry her

    I think Paul was operating under a general assumption that Churches would be made up of saved, reborn, and indwelt with the Holy Spirit Christians who had a desire to be righteous. He didn’t really write a lot to the lost and unregenerate.

    He addressed teen moms when he said “abstain from fornication”. He addressed divorce when he said “For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth”.

    Sometimes Christianity is go-no go. You either do it or you don’t.

  97. squid_hunt says:

    @Vandicus
    Proverbs 29:21 is probably as close as it gets. It’s worth noting that we are adopted into Christ’s family and that’s a good thing. That’s one of the reasons the church has always endorsed adoption. God was willing to adopt us and love us and welcome us in.

  98. thedeti says:

    Do you think this [getting babymamas married off] is also a factor in the church’s strategy? After all, babymommas are typically a drain on church resources, not a net gain…

    In my view, most churchgoers and pastors are trying to solve the problem of their parishioners’ complaints and problems. It’s the women saying “can’t find no good man” and “I wanna get married” especially after having come to the church or returned after a “prodigal period” – many times with a kid(s) in tow after an oops preggers or a failed marriage. It’s also them watching their lumpenprole omega soyboy members moping around and fumbling their way through their aimless lives. How do you solve that problem? Why, you get them married off to each other, that’s how!

  99. thedeti says:

    We now have a new name for pastors exhorting men to marry up sluts.

    Parkison’s Disease.

  100. thedeti says:

    @ AnonReader:

    But the church as a group got to pat themselves on the back for their enabling with “Well…at least we tried!”, so I guess that’s that.

    Hmm. Much like the Warhorn boys talking about Tim Bayly’s failed counseling for the parents of one of them. “Well….. at least he TRIED!” (Oh, and, well, he was wrong because he blamed my mother for a lot of it. And moms can’t be to blame. No. No no no. Can’t be a mom’s fault, ever. )

  101. Oscar says:

    @ Scott

    All of this, by the way is why I don’t assent to dating as an appropriate form of mate selection for my kids. It’s all sin covered up by formatting to make it look “romantic” or whatever.

    I agree. But that would be a lot easier to avoid in an environment where your kids grow up with a group of kids who all attend the same church, whose families you know, where all the adults have been friends for years, ideally even grew up together, etc.

    In other words, it’s a lot easier to do living in a community, which is a rare thing these days.

    For example, my oldest daughters just turned marriageable age, and I don’t know any of the young men in church. None. Not one. How am I supposed to screen them, if I don’t even know them?

  102. seventiesjason says:

    Well…..wasn’t Joesph a “step dad” to our Lord and Savior? I mean, he obeyed what he was told by that angel of the Lord. By all accounts he was a righteous man. Even Jesus followed in Joesph’s role to be a carpenter.

    Of course single mommies in the church are not “Mary” but looking deeper at the “concept” of this, Joesph was a step-dad and he just obeyed God. Now, Mary was indeed a righteous woman….a good girl…..but the implied lesson here too should be at least pondered.

    Culturally….can you imagine Joesph in this situation “Well guys, Mary was made pregnat by the Holy Spirit!” do you honestly think the people back then would say “Oh, of course…now that you explain it that way, we believe you. It’s perfectly clear now”

    No. People were probably “snickering” about what a chump Joesph was to take a woman who was already pregnant, or the “oh, of course you waited to be married to consumate….sure, yeah…..just tell us the truth Joesph…you and Mary couldn’t wait”

    He was a man who had to just endure, and he did the right thing. We don’t know much about him. We just know that all in all, he obeyed God, and took his duties seriously.

  103. thedeti says:

    Re: Adoption:

    Well, the closest it comes, and what I can think of, is the story of Mephibosheth in II Sam. 4 and II Sam. 9. King David was the best friend of Jonathan, King Saul’s son. Jonathan was killed in battle. Some years later, when David ascended to the throne, he sought out to find someone “of the house of Saul” to bless. He found Mephibosheth, Jonathan’s crippled son. The boy was around age 16 or 17. David restored Saul’s inheritance to Mephibosheth and moved him into David’s palace at Jerusalem.

    One could say David “adopted” Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth, in very large part out of his love and friendship for his fallen friend Jonathan.

  104. King Alfred says:

    Sadly, women’s choices have constrained the agency of men such that very few men are now able to marry non-obese, debt-free, tattoo-free virgins without major personality disorders. Most Christian men are left with the choice of “take it or leave it.” There simply aren’t enough women possessing even the most basic attributes of a good wife to fill the demand. Many men must decide between marring whores with children and not marrying at all. They have no other real options.

  105. squid_hunt says:

    @seventiesjason

    To say that Joseph was the stepdad would be to say that God first married Mary and then divorced her after getting her pregnant, making God a permanent cuckhold. There’s a lot of bad doctrine to be pulled out of that line of thinking.

    What happened with Mary was God getting back into the spontaneous creation business. It wasn’t joining with her.

    But I agree Joseph probably took a lot of heat. I heard a preacher preach that the reason the pharisees threw out that “We know who our father is.” was to insult Jesus, which is quite possible.

  106. seventiesjason says:

    Adding to my above comment….if it “wasn’t” important for the Savior to have a “father” why was he approached by an angel of the Lord to “do the right thing and marry her”

    Why wasn’t “Mary” then protected from being stoned to death by the future Savior she was carrying? Why did God even consider a “father” to His only son on Earth? Joesph I am sure had to teach the child, guide him………yet he must have wondered deeply to himself “How can I ever do this? How can I guide this child to be the leader he will become?” “What good am I in these matters, when I am not his father? How can I ever step up to the level of God Himself?”

    I grew up in small town America, and Nazareth was not some bustling cosmo town…….he probably had to just stand firm in his faith and do the best job he could to what he was entrusted with…….I can only imagine the talk behind his back by the self-righteous, the local rabbi……and others years later after Jesus was a child “Guy married a woman who got pregger by another guy……..what a beta!”

  107. 7817 says:

    We now have a new name for pastors exhorting men to marry up sluts.

    Parkison’s Disease.

    Dank, but fair.

  108. seventiesjason says:

    Oh good heavens Squid…………I am trying to imply culturally in this world of what happened……deep down Joesph KNEW he wasn’t that childs father, and yet had to raise him and guide him, and teach him.

    Do you think anyone would have believed Joesph, or Mary? Notta one, or if they did….it was nods of agreement “yes of course, it happened the way you said” while not believing a word of it.

    It reflects later even when Christ starts his ministry how many “never believed”

  109. Daniel says:

    We should leave it to each man to judge for himself, whether a sinful woman has been born again, and whether he should marry her. Although as a general rule, young men are pretty naive and have little chance of understanding the betrayal they potentially face. Pastors should warn men to consider very carefully before they enter such a relationship. But I wouldn’t condemn it as always wrong.

    On the other hand, in the US and many other places, the legal system and the culture is stacked against you. It should be that if you marry a woman and adopt her children, they are legally yours, period. If she divorces you, she has to leave her children. Under such circumstances, when a unmarried mother married, her motives would be much less suspect.

  110. thedeti says:

    Jason:

    >It reflects later even when Christ starts his ministry how many “never believed”

    Yeah. “Mmmmhmmm. Isn’t this Joseph’s “son”? Isn’t this that carpenter’s kid from Nazareth? How can anything good come out of Nazareth, that little shithole one-camel town? And, yeah, we all know about this Jesus guy. Mmmhmm. Yeah. Joseph’s his “dad”. Yeah.”

  111. Oscar says:

    @ vandicus

    Interestingly the Bible doesn’t seem to recommend adoption at any point(though it does encourage caring for widows and orphans). Possibly because of the innate risks making it generally a bad idea.

    As an adoptive father of five, I’m aware of two things. First, the inherent risks, and second, that you’re wrong.

    There are over 40 scriptures that specifically command us to care for orphans (or “the fatherless”). God didn’t tell us how to care for orphans, but He did command us to care for them. As usual, God expects us to use the brains with which He blessed us to figure out how to carry out his commands, and adoption is one obvious way to obey God’s command to care for orphans.

    Here are a few basic principles of Bible interpretation. First; if God repeats a commandment over 40 times, it’s probably very important to Him. Second; if we want to know how to obey God’s commandments, one good method is to imitate Him.

    Romans 8:15 For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.”

    Romans 8:23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.

    Galatians 4:4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.

    6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”

    Ephesians 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved.

    God the Father has only one begotten son (John 1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, John 3:18, 1 John 4:9), and you ain’t Him. If you’re a son of God, you’re adopted.

    Third; another method to learn how to obey God’s commandments is to learn how the early Church obeyed God’s commandments.

    Thus was Origen adopted, after Leonidas, his father, had suffered martyrdom, by a pious woman in Alexandria. Again the child of the female martyr, Felicitas, found a mother; and of Severus, a Palestinian composer, who especially interested himself in the orphans and widows of those who had fallen. ~ Eusebius, Church History

    Again, sometimes foundlings which heartless parents have exposed in order to their being cared for by any passer-by, are picked up by holy virgins, and are presented for baptism by these persons, who neither have nor desire to have children of their own. ~ St. Augustine’s Epistle to Boniface

    Christians took in these exposed children to save them, though often they could do nothing more than bury them, as the tombs of many children and inscriptions in the catacombs attest (Diehl II, 142–143); in some cases consecrated virgins (Aug., Ep. 98) or benevolent wealthy families educated them. ~ The Encyclopedia of Ancient Christianity

    Adoption has been one of the Church’s central ministries since its inception. Primarily, they adopted the children of martyred saints, and then children abandoned by their pagan parents.

    Let’s not pretend now – after 2,000 years of church history – that adoption is discouraged by the God who adopted us. We’re Christians, not Muslims.

  112. seventiesjason says:

    And what became of Joesph? Well…..we knew he was a carpenter. We know of that situation when Jesus “was missing” but later found at the Temple…………but then…..nothing. Poof.

    Can we assume he died before Jesus started his ministry? And if that is indeed the case. It just shows plainly how you, as a man……….obeying God, you may not be rewarded for anything you do. Your reward comes in the hereafter. Did this man who raised the son of God even get to see the results of his work, effort, and perhaps even getting some justification of all the riddicule by “fellow men” at the end when Christ hung on that Cross? No. What needs to be said was said.

    He was a man who was tasked, did the job probably with little grumbling, endured a lot of heat from fellow men and didn’t even get a thank you.

    Puts the thing in persoective to me. No, I am not Joesph…..but I can tell you one thing. I know his walk when it comes to being alone, dutiful, standing alone and staying the course that was indeed charted for him.

  113. purge187 says:

    “Single Christian moms are as pure as the sinless Son of God, which is more than you deserve in a wife.”

    I had to click on the link to see if he actually said that. He did.

    Has he been struck by lightning yet?

  114. thedeti says:

    purge:

    https://samuelparkison.wordpress.com/2018/10/29/ministry-update/

    This is Sam Parkison with his wife and kids.

    I’ll leave you to assess where all this comes from.

    Also google W. Bradford Wilcox, Dennis Rainey, and Jim Geraghty for reference.

    Physiognomy is real. Just sayin’.

  115. Pingback: Do Single Christian Men Owe Marriage to Christian Single Moms? | The 96th Thesis

  116. seventiesjason says:

    My hair was just like that in my twenties and thirties……blonde though. He ripped off my glasses too Deti………sigh…….everyone wants to be “me” and then co-opts it 😉

    WIfe cute. Healthy children.

  117. Frank K says:

    Can we assume he died before Jesus started his ministry?

    That is what tradition says.

    FWIW, Joseph is held in the highest regard by the prereformation churches. In the West his feast day is March 19 and he is the Patron Saint of the Universal Church.

  118. Frank K says:

    Many men must decide between marring whores with children and not marrying at all. They have no other real options.

    Had I faced that choice decades ago, I would have remained single.

  119. princeasbel says:

    Lastly, the whole perspective betrays a contempt for Christian married fathers, especially the Christian men who marry repentant single mothers with full understanding of what they are taking on. Instead of treating these men with respect, Parkison dismisses their graciousness by pretending it wasn’t gracious at all!

    This is a frequent point made by Calvinists like myself, and many Calvinist teachers. If God’s grace can be demanded, it’s not grace. To make mercy something you can demand means that it’s owed to you, which upsets the entire meaning of those words. It’s unmerited favor. You deserve punishment, but you receive mercy at God’s discretion.

    This man isn’t saying single mothers who became single mothers by whoring around should thank their lucky stars that an upstanding Christian man decided to take her and her child(ren) under his wing. He’s scorning the men who won’t sign up for that task when they’re under no obligation to do so!

    In theory, it sounds wonderful. A good man generously gives his love and care to a woman who deserves to be spurned by him. It has a damsel-in-distress vibe to it. Surely a single mother struggling to make ends meet would just fall into his arms and serve him as best as she can out of overwhelming gratitude. Of course, that’s not going to happen, because for the same reason she won’t obey him and surrender her authority to him is the same reason she’s a single mother in the first place. She’ll spit in the face of her gullible white-knight husband, and he won’t be able to comprehend it. He was such a good guy!

    Now here’s the thing: If a man knew full-well that’s the end-result of marrying a single mother and he did so anyway, then he’s either very stupid, or he really is that selfless. But this author isn’t painting single mothers as the stuck up, ungrateful whores that they are. Instead, he’s depicting the men who would wisely steer away from them as evil villains. Don’t you understand that you’re losing an opportunity to live out the gospel??

    Let me tell you something- When Christ saves people, he is GUARANTEED their love and obedience. It may be imperfect in this life, but in heaven, it will be perfect. Men who marry sluts can’t take out their wives’ hearts of stone and give them hearts of flesh. They have no guarantee that anything they do for her will resonate with her and bring her sinful behavior to bear.

    I’m sure as a man you think that a slut who finds a good husband SHOULD be grateful and sweet and reverent, but that’s not how it works in real life. Women aren’t men. Good, Christian women still look out for themselves before anyone else. You think a single mother would do better??? Give me a break.

    Also, @Opus,

    Thirdly, you will sooner or later hear words to the effect such as ‘you cant make me do that you are not my Father’.

    TRUTH. EFFING TRUTH! Every single man with a girlfriend needs to hear these words of warning. I posted a variation of this on my Facebook. Thank you, Opus.

    And thank you, Dalrock, for shining a light on this subject once again.

  120. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    @ Jack Russell.

    She said that she has slept with so many men, between 100 and 200, that she has lost count of her number of conquests.

    Her loss of her virginity as a 12-year-old was just the start of an obsession that took over her life.

    She admitted that the underage sex was ‘wrong’ and that her desires extended to both sexes.

    One one occasion, when in her 20s, Ms Woodruff had sex with six men at once at a Liverpool sex party while her ex watched.

    I suspect there are professional prostitutes who wouldn’t got that far.

    ‘To be dominated has always been my thing but I became a slave to this type of guy,’ she said.

    I’m guessing she’s an Alpha Widow many times over. Broken beyond repair as wife material.

    Of course, she’s taken this as an opportunity to write a novel. And using this public “confession” as a chance to promote that novel:

    She said that, as well as having kept a diary throughout her struggle, it was through meeting other sex addicts that she had the idea for her novel.

    But please don’t blame her. She’s a victim of “abusive relationships.” And don’t you dare judge her:

    Many of the women she met had had similar problems to her on their path to addiction, including dysfunctional families and abusive relationships.

    They all felt a ‘burning shame’ when they wanted to turn to sex, Ms Woodruff added.

    There was a discrepancy between men being a ‘legend or a player’ if they were promiscuous and highly sexed women being judged harshly.

    And yes, now that’s she 30 and with child, she’s seeking a Nice Guy (hopefully, someone she can be attracted to:

    Monogamy is now the aim, the 30-year-old added, but she will always be ‘highly sexual’.

  121. thedeti says:

    Jason:

    The point is that Parkison is typical of this set. Gracile, feminine facial features. Probably mid to late 20s but looks prepubescent. Soft, effete, boyish, puerile, unmasculine. Goofy, shit-eating grin.

    Brad Wilcox: Lumpenbourgeois look. Round, full face, unassertive look in the eyes, outdated unsuited hairstyle, lumpy, pudgy, out of shape.

    Jim Geraghty: Much the same as Wilcox. Soft, pudgy look. Double chin from years of processed food. Eyes bespeak timidity and passiveness.

    It’s just a low-T look. And more and more men look like this as time has gone on. It’s consistent with the reports that T levels in men have been dropping for decades.

    Here’s a photo of swing-era bandleader Glenn Miller probably circa 1940.

    The guy worked all his life as a professional musician. Not the most masculine of professions, right? OK, but Miller is a more masculine appearing specimen than most of the writers exhorting men to “man up” here. (Not to mention that Miller was one of the best ever at his craft.)

  122. thedeti says:

    Here’s a photo of men circa 1925. Don’t know who they are. They’re smiling and dressed in the clothes of the age, obviously posed for the photo. These men appear to me to range in age from roughly 25 to 45.

    But notice them: Trim (even the older man on the right). Not hard, but not soft or lumpy either.
    Each has a resolute, determined look, even while smiling and even when the man second from right has his arms looped inside those of the men next to him. And even though that man is quite diminutive, even for the time. Each of them projects confidence, determination, resolution.

    Most men now don’t look like this, at all.

  123. thedeti says:

    But these are the men in their 20s and 30s of the early 2000s. Partakers of “soyboy culture”.

    http://www.returnofkings.com/165452/36-soy-boy-pictures-that-reveal-an-epidemic-of-feminized-men

  124. @thedeti, in fairness Glenn Miller was a big band leader, so it’s like the front man of a rock group, not surprised he was a masculine dude.

  125. Otto says:

    @thedeti: I believe the man on the left is the golfer Bobby Jones. Odds are the others are also golfers of the day.

  126. thedeti says:

    greenmantle:

    OK. Here’s a photo of “regular guys” circa 1940s.

    http://www.vintageinn.ca/2015/04/may-26th-suit-up-swing-style-thelindylook/1940s-men-style/

    Even the dorky dude on the right exudes more masculinity than today’s soyboys.

  127. thedeti says:

    Otto:

    Ok. Here’s an article showing photos of men circa 1920s.

    http://nextluxury.com/mens-style-and-fashion/1920s-mens-fashion-style-guide/

    Yes, yes, yes, I know there are photos of famous people there. There’s one of President Warren G. Harding. Another is of Henry Ford. Look at the photos of the regular guys.

  128. Otto says:

    “If God’s grace can be demanded, it’s not grace. To make mercy something you can demand means that it’s owed to you, which upsets the entire meaning of those words.”

    The largest church in the USA teaches the prosperity gospel, which has as its core message: if you give to God (usually described as tithing faithfully), then god MUST bless you; you can bind God and force him to perform an action–blessing you–by giving.

    And, this message is taught in many churches–the idea that you can somehow control God’s actions. Be it by giving (usually backed up–incorrectly–by verses out of Malachi) or by “decree and declaring” (which isn’t back up by any scripture).

  129. Original Laura says:

    @Scott

    Sometimes the bio dad gets no real say in whether the step dad adopts the child. In some jurisdictions, if the bio dad fails to pay child support for six straight months, it creates the possibility of his parental rights being terminated, which then permits the step dad to adopt. And some men are willing to sign away parental rights in order to avoid child support payments, particularly if they have multiple children with multiple women and the child being adopted does not live nearby.

  130. seventiesjason says:

    Those men from 1925 Deti don’t look like they “shoveled” coal for a living, nor do they look my Welsh ancestors who mined slate 12 hours a day / six days a week in Bewtys A Coed, Wales.

    I don’t see it Deti. I see a young man who has a profession that doesn’t require bench pressing 175lbs at so many reps at 8,000 ft. He’s average looking. I wished I looked that good at his age. Those men from 1925 don’t look like this either. Bing Crosby didn’t look like a muscle bound guy and yet he was a tyrant of a man in house. Sinatra was hardly ready for a boxing match.

    I bet most of the men in this forum don’t lift, and are far from being in top shape for their age, BMI, and don’t look as “good-as-they-did” when they were 22…..

    My father was a construction worker…..he was solid, but tall and lean as a greyhound…..and my old man worked for a living.

    Not every man is gonna be able to fight like John Wicke, or throw like Eli Manning, and have a pugalistic look to him…..and if that what makes a man……well, I guess it is “looks”

    Tiger Woods is a consumate golfer and preppie….and despite his “softness” it didn’t stop him from being chased by a crazed scandanvian woman at a gated golf community

  131. Otto says:

    @thedeti,

    100 years ago, a “regular” man would spend a week’s pay on a suit. Today, a regular guy will spend a week’s pay on a pair of sneakers or a sports jersey. Both though, are dong the same thing: investing large amounts of money in presenting an image.

    Yea, I think the older images look classier, but if those men were alive today, would they be wearing suits or modern (classless) garb).

  132. thedeti says:

    Jason:

    Even the 1920s Charleston dancer and suit-wearing guys in that article look more masculine than today’s skinnyfat, puffy, processed food eating effete desk jockeys like Jim Geraghty, Brad Wilcox, and Sam Parkison.

  133. thedeti says:

    Otto: It’s not so much the clothes as it is the physiognomy.

    Compare the hardened masculine resolute look of men 100 years ago and 80 years ago, with the soyboy of today.

    The trim physique of yesteryear with the skinnyfat or puffy look today.

    The resolute determined rugged faces of then; with the timid-eyed, passive, hesitant, puffy, double chinned from all that MSG and HFCS food, of today.

  134. thedeti says:

    All right. I’ve made my point. I’ll leave it here. I’ve derailed the thread enough. People who’ve been around these parts know what I’m talking about, and I know that AnonS knows.

  135. Otto says:

    Even the dorky dude on the right exudes more masculinity than today’s soyboys.

    1) The testosterone problem is real. Today’s men have a fraction of the T flowing through their veins as men of previous generations.

    2) I suspect even the man on the right ate healthier than most men today. There was little in the way of fast and processed foods in his day. His diet mostly consisted of whole foods. If he ate desert at all, it was probably no more than once a week at Sunday dinner.

    The high levels of sugar and carbs in today’s diet is directly correlated to the obesity of men. Low T and body fat (particularly waist fat) are correlated in men (but it’s a chicken and egg question as to which comes first).

  136. seventiesjason says:

    I think that’s most people Deti….and eating processed food we’re all guilty of to a point…..there is nothing wrong with a desk job. 99% of the men in here are not linemen, lumberjacks, smoke-jumpers, professional swim instructors, nor do any own a gym, work in a foundry, subsistence farm and work as a blacksmith.

    Plenty of men are out of shape, or could-be-in-better shape. Agreed. But seeing that pic from 1925 and looking at Parkinson…….style changes….but I don’t see the men in 1925 oozing deep, panty wetting masculinity either.

  137. thedeti says:

    Jason:

    It’s not the fact that people work desk jobs. I work a desk job. I don’t expect “masculine” men to work traditional “masculine” professions like cop, athletic trainer, firefighter, coal miner, lumberjack, or oil rig worker. It’s about their physical appearances.

  138. seventiesjason says:

    Parkinson is an average looking man. Plenty of men look worse (me) and a lot look better. You are also comparing him with men that are much older (Wilcox for example).

    I don’t like judging a man on or woman on their physical appearance a a Christian. Why? Because I freaking hate when its done to me, and its frequently.

    You don’t like his ideas. Fine. I don’t either…..but he’s a dad. His wife is cute. He has kids. I don’t. He probably if hit walked, or had a bit more or somewhat of a workout routine could probably look a bit better I am sure. As we all could.

  139. Otto says:

    @thedeti,

    I get your point: men’s physiology has changed; men are not as physically manly as they were a century ago.

    Any, maybe that’s something Dalrock should spend a little more time on. I don’t think it’s (all) psychological (in fact, the physical is probably affecting the psychological), but there is something going on.

    Environmental, nutritional, or psychological, something is causing the T levels in men to drop through the floor. While the men’s movement has noted it, there’s not a lot being done (or even spoken) about it.

  140. Oscar says:

    Having a desk job doesn’t condemn one to a life of obesity and/or weakness. Both are a choice for most of us.

    I’m an engineer by profession. I’m no longer on active duty, and even my job in the Reserves no longer requires the kind of physical fitness I used to maintain on active duty. Additionally, I’ve had four surgeries to correct injuries I received while on active duty.

    And yet, just yesterday, I did some bench presses in my garage gym, and then I went out back and flipped a 600 lb tractor tire (that a farmer friend of mine gave me) for a few rounds.

    For most of us, weakness is a choice.

    For most of us, strength is a choice.

    Or rather, a series of choices.

    And, by the way, none of this requires elite genetics. I was never much of an athlete. In high school, I was mediocre, at best. But, if you keep at it for years, strength builds up.

    A man is more than just a mind and spirit. A man is also a body. And that body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. If you love the Holy Spirit, you’ll maintain His temple.

  141. Otto says:

    It’s about their physical appearances.

    Part of the problem is the unisex aspect of today’s clothing.

    I’m wearing jeans and a polo shirt at the moment. So are a lot of women. For whatever reason, most traditional men’s styles have migrated over to also become common women’s styles. Making it difficult to dress in an overt masculine style.

    About five years ago, I attended a funeral for a coworker. One of the attendees was a guy who normally pretty sloppily dressed: t-shirts & jeans. On top of that was a marshmallow of a guy physically. They prototypical soy-boy. He showed up at the funeral in a perfectly fit men’s suit. Hair cut in a short, neat style. Everything trim, pressed, & polished. He looking fan-freaking-takstic–and masculine. Women were actually staring at him and asking “is that Jimmy?”

    The point being, clothing does have as much affect on how masculine we perceive a man to be as his physiology. But, other than a men’s suit, there is little in the way of clothing that projects a masculine image.

  142. seventiesjason says:

    Otto,I mean how can they be? A lot of men grew up on a farm, or had to work as young boys….and not like me as a teenager where I worked at GAP folding shirts and khakis all day (ughh). People did eat not necessarily healthier…but they ate better. Agreed.

    I was a Boy Scout Scoutmaster for ten years……even Baden Powell (founder of Scouting) said in the early 1990’s that “boys and todays young men are soft, out of shape, and need a jolly game with rules” (Scouting). I do agree with you on the state of manhood so to speak in the matters you brought up.

    But flashing black and white pictures from ages gone by doesn’t ooze manhood or masculinity in many of them. People dressed better for sure. People were healthier. T counts were highre….but Parkinson is an average looking guy. Plenty of men his age look much much worse.

  143. seventiesjason says:

    Oscar, proud of you. I can’t flip a 600 pound tire and I doubt most of the men in here could. I’ve done plenty of hiking and camping. I’ve carried a pack up around trails at high altitudes for the USA (8000-10,000ft). I did a high altitude 10 mile swim (7000 ft) at the Boy Scout camp I brought my couts to every summer for ten years…..and I was one of the only Scoutmasters who dared tried…..and completed it at 46. My cardio is that of a man that is in his twenties, but muscular? No. I have tone and definition though. Some of it is genetic…..always been an ectomorph……..but I am not going to be throwing bails of hay off a bailer and stack them on a wagon. I probably could be an okay distance runner.

    Any yet…..

    Parkinson (he does have youth on his side) is a much more attractive man than me.

  144. Opus says:

    The level of couture – I mean the way people dress – has fallen off a cliff these last sixty years and one can see that so clearly in old newsreel. Even people going on holiday wore a suit; for reasons I won’t go into I know I was wearing as an eleven year old my school uniform and cap when my Father took me and my brother to Gamages toyshop in London’s Regent Street (not to buy just to window-shop) just after that Xmas; the Beatles wore matching suits on stage as did many other bands (but NOT The Rolling Stones).

    I look forward to an essay at Heartiste’s where he explains one raises ones SMV by two or three points just by wearing formal clothing. Women can ape that of course but in the main don’t and even when they do will easily be assumed to be a dyke which is perhaps not quite the message intended.

  145. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Otto: The largest church in the USA teaches the prosperity gospel, which has as its core message: if you give to God (usually described as tithing faithfully), then god MUST bless you; you can bind God and force him to perform an action — blessing you — by giving.

    I’ve read that the Talmud preaches similar doctrines. That God has contractual obligations to man (or at least to Jews.) That if a Jew performs certain rituals, then God must reciprocate in specific ways, otherwise God would be sinning. That the Torah is a binding contract between Jews and God, and each party has obligations to the other.

  146. seventiesjason says:

    I’m one of the last people in the USA that wears a shirt and tie while flying.

  147. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Jason, it seems to me that Mary’s pregnancy was not widely known.

    According to Matthew 1:19: Joseph was a man who always did what was right, but he did not want to disgrace Mary publicly; so he made plans to break the engagement privately.

    Why would Joseph break off “privately” if Mary’s pregnancy was publicly known?

    The virgin birth has led to much twisting of doctrine. One Christmas I read a Catholic church’s newsletter, which said that Mary was a homeless single mother.

    Obviously, she was not a single mother. She had been engaged to Joseph and remained pure. And he stayed with her after she conceived Jesus. And she and Joseph were not homeless. They had a home. They were simply unable to find a vacancy while traveling.

  148. Oscar says:

    @ Jason

    Any yet…..

    Parkinson (he does have youth on his side) is a much more attractive man than me.

    So? I never said anything about attractiveness. I’m not really interested in men’s attractiveness, because I’m neither a chick, nor gay. Nor am I a gamer who teaches men how to get laid. I leave all that stuff to others.

    I do care about strength, and general fitness, because both are rewarding regardless of circumstances, and because they’re useful in life in general. Strength has been an essential part of manhood since God created us, which is why it’s a leading indicator of health and longevity. God designed us to be strong. Some more than others, of course, but we can all pursue strength.

    Modern life no longer provides us with the need, or means, to get strong doing daily chores. Therefore, contrary to Pastor Bayly, and the Warhorners, who think muscles built in the gym are “artificial”, we need to lift weights to get strong.

    Again, a man is more than just a mind and spirit. A man is also a body. And that body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. If you love the Holy Spirit, you’ll maintain His temple.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25921473

  149. Opus says:

    So did Parkison take his own advice and marry-up a single Mum. I would have said on the basis of the photograph at the top of his Twitter feed, the answer has to be a resounding Noooooooooooo. Hypocrite; what he needs to do then is to divorce the present wife or if that is not theologically sound to arrange for a tragic accident but with much plausible deniability of course – you know, encourage her to take a selfie at the local zoo but in one of the enclosures and thereafter marry a single mum preferably with more than one child and by more than one Father. Christianity is so I hear all about suffering and he will suffer thus pleasing God.

    I would also like to say that looking at his Twitter he is pushing his new book and I see that he talks of what a healthy church leader of music looks like. This struck me as odd – in all my copious study of music I never once heard any of my many teachers say ‘Opus, you must be healthier about this subject’. Health is I presume the opposite of toxic and is thus a buzz-word meaning I suspect little or nothing. Is this I wonder the American obsession with health and defeating mortality. Health is merely the absence of ill health. Plagal cadences are just that and exist beyond the bounds of the medical profession.

  150. Joe2 says:

    For all of our theological maturity, we still expect that marriage to a beautiful virgin is our entitled reward for not having sex in high school. I am convinced that many Christian young man have not fully shaken off this terrible theology.

    I think Pr Parkison makes a good point. It’s an indictment of the theology that was taught at youth camp, etc. and not the fault of the young man. This raises the larger question of whether something presented as good theology today will be considered terrible theology say in 10 years? And the cycle just repeats. Another Phd candidate writes a paper critical of what is taught at today’s youth camp, etc.

  151. Otto says:

    @Red Pill Latecomer,

    In the Old Testament, God laid out a set of rewards and punishments for Israel if they obeyed (or disobeyed) the Mosaic law (see Duet 28).

    Christians are not under the Old Covenant, nor are they bound by the Mosaic law. Christians are under the New Covenant, which is grace–an unearned gift from God.

    You are right though, that doctrines like the prosperity gospel are throwbacks to the Old Covenant. They do rebind Christians back under the law, which (as any Christian should know) does not save.

  152. seventiesjason says:

    RPL to not haul her before the “rabbi” or the “town” and embarrass her……a righteous man he was would have decorum to “break it off privately” (beta behavior in this world)

    She was pregnant, went to visit her cousin, was overjoyed……Nazareth was a tiny hamlet……..they even have a “song” for her in one of the Gospels….people knew she was pregnant…….Joseph had integrity for himself as a man…….and compassion that Mary “to break the engagement privately”

    If people didn’t know……then why was it mentioned?

    Look, even in my Corps……one Christmas we were told “Here was a teenage single mom….” (referring to Mary)

  153. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    If people didn’t know……then why was it mentioned?

    My Catholic study bible says that, according to tradition, Luke interviewed many of the Apostles and disciples of Jesus, including Mary. And that Luke likely got the details about Elizabeth, Joseph, and Jesus in the temple, etc., directly from Mary.

  154. seventiesjason says:

    RPL….

    Okay. Disregard all I said above. No one knew, everyone thought Joesph was his dad from day one, and he had no heat to deal with. My bad.

  155. vfm7916 says:

    @seventiesjason

    I think you meant 1890.

  156. seventiesjason says:

    Yeah vfm….fault finders all of you that you are….thanks

  157. Mandy says:

    Who in their right mind views a child conceived by rape as a silver lining?

    If his daughter were raped would he truely see a subsequent pregnancy as more beneficial than if the crime had not resulted in conception? How would he suggest one explain to such a child who their father was? The child itself deserves not to be killed and to be raided with love but no one would consider him or her a desired outcome.

  158. squid_hunt says:

    O/T:

    Woman who slept her way to the top says it’s not fair VP Pence won’t be alone with her.

  159. Oscar says:

    @ squid_hunt

    It’s a very low bar, but VP Pence is clearly the wisest man in DC. After all the take-downs, and attempted take-downs of powerful men, with stories of sexual misconduct (both substantiated and unsubstantiated), anyone who claims VP Pence is wrong for following the Graham doctrine is clearly gunning for him. Nothing more.

  160. BillyS says:

    What a gamma you are Jason.

    OT: So this is how your pal Romney acts IBB? He would have been an enabler president and possibly even worse than Obama.

  161. BillyS says:

    We are causing more children to be in horrible circumstances with the claim we don’t want any to feel bad because of their circumstances. Bunch of idiots.

  162. seventiesjason says:

    Billy:

    First. What is a Gamma? Second: Never voted Romney. Third: Romney is a successful businessman, has operated a large business as a CEO, and ran for president..has a family, a faithful wife….has adopted children……doesn’t drink or smoke…..is far from looking like a soyboy (and truth be told….more than few of the boastful men probably look as soyboy as pajama boy). Romney has left a bigger impact on the world than you and I ever will….so the joke is probably on us.

  163. seventiesjason says:

    And…..

    What we have now isn’t working. At least…..at least there is a call by this Parkinson fellow who understands that a child needs a father………if I went by the logic of this comment thread, all the kids to single mommies should pay for her sins and be denied a father, since mom is such a ho.

    I have met plenty of men in my life who have said “Never knew my bio-dad: he was just causing trouble when he was around / is in prison / is a loser / never did anything for me / walked out / quit the house…….my step-dad is my father. I love him / did things for me / was there / did the best he could for me / I owe him a lot”

    These comments all came from my boys in my Scout Troop. I am sure all these step-dads were cucks and losers and thirsty to be a beta……(sarcasm mine)

    Sure, maybe a few were……but we hear all the time how “dads count” and here is someone at least proposing the idea that they do……now some of his ways are a bit suspect……I don’t view a single mom as “holy” per say just because she gave birth………many are terrible mothers. Agreed.

    But to think a 35 year old never married man is gonna somehow “become alpha” marry a quaint 18 year old virgin in the church is pretty far-fetched for most Christian men…..even those who “claim” to be alpha or have many of those traits.

    I don’t think, I know men count and matter in a childs life….and if indeed a man can single mom who has indeed repented, witnessed the fruit of her spirit and has been changed not for Christ, but by him………..what’s the problem? Why this animosity? For many men….this will indeed be their only choice to be a father.

  164. Oscar says:

    @ Jason

    I don’t think, I know men count and matter in a childs life….and if indeed a man can single mom who has indeed repented, witnessed the fruit of her spirit and has been changed not for Christ, but by him………..what’s the problem? Why this animosity?

    1. Because Parkison nowhere mentions the very real risks of marrying a single mom.

    2. Because Parkison lies by claiming that marrying a single mom is not a burden.

    3. Because Parkison falsely accuses men of being Pharisees for preferring to avoid the risks of marrying a single mom.

    4. Because Parkison makes no attempt to explain to the men he slanders how they might discern whether or not a single mom is actually repentant.

    5. Because Parkison makes no such concession for men with a checkered past. As you, yourself, stated on March 13, 2019 at 4:18 pm

    Many women have written me off because of my past drug use and abuse. I have repented. I turned away and rebuilt my life, my integrity and reputation……and this still isn’t “good enough” for most. I have never relapsed.

    Waiting for a sermon to women about men like me…….not counting on that.

    Well said. Those are just a few reasons why.

  165. 7817 says:

    Jason, here: https://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/search?q=gamma&m=1

    It’s tough love. Hope these help you as much as they helped me.

  166. Scott says:

    Testosterone shmestosterone.

    I just moved about a ton of snow by myself because I was bored. I’ll be 48 this year.

    https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2019/03/14/the-trenches-of-insanity/

  167. seventiesjason says:

    All men have a checkered past. Mine just happens to be worse than most of yours……..

    Getting married is a risk. Period. So is driving a scooter in California traffic, so is owning a gun……so is getting up and going to work in the morning. So is enlisting in a volunteer military and being sent to defend and die for “national interests” like oil, and more oil, and and oil……I have seen firsthand changed lives of a fatherless child because a father DID step up, discern and marry a single mother.

    All men are fools compared to you……..what lies? He gave an impassioned sermon. He published a book no one will read………..what’s the problem? It’s easy for most of you to talk like this because you did marry perfect women, have children, are fathers and have great marriages. I mean, most men would be lucky enough to be you…..but they are not.

    The reality is, in the church……most men are gonna have to marry the “single mom” because there will be no other choice.

  168. seventiesjason says:

    7817…..it lost me after the first comment. My name is Jason. I am a man, born again, repentant have accomplished much. I don’t live my life from terms of a greek fraternity….and I actually grow more when I do and not waste time reading an endless chain of comments about who is Gamma, deltoid, sigma nu………

    I can speak a foreign language fluently. Have lived in a variety of places here in the USA and around the world……can’t and won’t waste my time with terms men use to classify how manly they are while then trashing another man for supposedly how unmanly he is.

    Tough love. The real tough love in the world is finally understanding that none of other man classify you as doesn’t matter.

    If you gave me a sentence I might have listened.

  169. Oscar says:

    @ seventiesjason

    All men are fools compared to you…….

    You’re lying again, Jason. I never stated that “all men are fools compared” to anyone, much less me. Why do you feel the need to lie about me, Jason?

    what lies?

    I listed two lies of commission and one lie of omission. Go back, read them again, and try dealing with what I actually wrote for a change.

    He gave an impassioned sermon. He published a book no one will read………..what’s the problem?

    I listed five problems. Again, try dealing with what I actually wrote for a change.

    It’s easy for most of you…

    Most of whom? I’m one man. I speak for myself, and no one else. Try dealing with what I actually wrote for a change, and don’t apply other people’s words to me.

    … to talk like this because you did marry perfect women, have children, are fathers and have great marriages. I mean, most men would be lucky enough to be you…..but they are not.

    You’re lying again, Jason. I never stated that I married a perfect woman, nor that I have a great marriage, nor that anyone would be lucky to be me. Why do you feel the need to lie about me, Jason?

  170. ray says:

    As was the case with Nathan before, go and look at a photo of ‘pastor’ Parkison.

    He’s just a kid! A kid pretending to be Christ’s guide for His people.

    One glance confirms that young Parkison has no business leading one of God’s churches. None. He has nowhere near the life-experience necessary for the job; indeed, he looks like he should be in some college cafeteria somewhere, braining up for the next exam in Grievance Studies.

    Taking this boy, his ‘church’, and his arguments seriously is ludicrous. No wonder he made a statement like ‘single Christian moms are as pure as the Son of God’. He ain’t let go of his mammy’s tit long enough to speak a mature sentence in Christ!

    I see this constantly in Professional Christian America. The bubble-loop mill of high school/college grads going to seminary, or divinity school, or bible college, as supposed preparation to pastor. They then emerge with PhDs in Jesus — plus the latest world mandates, including female supremacy — and are hired by elder dorks who obtained the same non-preparation for THEIR career-church lives. There is little chance these boys will deviate from the worldly scripts of their churchian elders.

    These ubiquitous false churches and pastors shut the mouths of the prophets and servants of the LORD. And don’t the Grlls know it. Professional Christianity is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Woman, Inc., and the lifelong incomes of these people are dependent almost completely on Keeping Females Happy. So, they do. ‘What was your name again?’ is what the King is gonna say.

    God didn’t even SHOW me His holy book until I was in my mid-forties. He had me read most of the world’s literature before He opened up His. By then I had the life-experience to understand things about Scripture that would have been impossible at age 25 or 30. Indeed, would have been even more impossible had I attended one of those bible colleges or seminaries.

    This bullshit is all coming down. Don’t be under the roof when it caves.

  171. seventiesjason says:

    Oscar…..before you get yourself into a high-T rage, take it down a 1000

    Your above comments are really silly. I am not lying about you. By your actions, your comments, your attitude to me over the years here…you do have a perfect marriage. All men are stupid compared to you (well, if they disagree with you) and frankly you getting worked over a guy like me shows some severe insecurity. Scott is a psychologist (or is he psychiatrist….apologies if I am wrong) you and he have similar situations. He can help you.

    so now lies are of commission and omission. You never stated that in your original statement and I was always taught a lie is a lie………there are more than one now?

    I have tried to understand or reason or even ponder what you have said, and the only conclusion that I can come up with…you just don’t like me. Fair enough. The sun will still rise and set despite this.

    I made a point about being a dad to kid with no dad around. Perish the thought. How dare me!

  172. Oscar says:

    @ seventiesjason

    I am not lying about you. By your actions, your comments, your attitude to me over the years here…you do have a perfect marriage. All men are stupid compared to you (well, if they disagree with you)

    Unless you can show one quote in which I stated that I have a perfect marriage, or all men are stupid compared to me, then you are, in fact, lying.

    Once again, Jason, why do you feel the need to lie about me? Why do you feel the need to lie at all?

    I made a point about being a dad to kid with no dad around. Perish the thought. How dare me!

    Then do so, Jason. No one is stopping you. I adopted five kids with father or mother. You type about “being a dad to kid with no dad around”, and then lie about me. “Perish the thought” that you should actually do what say, rather than lie on the internet.

  173. Scott says:

    Scott’s rule of Dalrock comment threads.

    Given enough time and comments, all Dalrock post threads devolve into a discussion about why Jason can’t get laid.

  174. seventiesjason says:

    Where do I start Oscar, I have disagreed with you many times over the years here…you fly into a ‘roid rage about how “wrong” I always am. Your actions towards me have demonstrated that you do have a perfect marriage, and that I am indeed stupid compared to you.

    What do you care?

    Men like you have made it impossible for me to adopt. What? A single man wants to adopt a child? We can’t have that! Children need a mother and father!!!! The Bible says this, or that!!!!

    Ironically……and sadly, if I was gay….I WOULD be able to adopt as a single man with much more ease than as a straight Christian man.

    To be a foster parent I might as well hire and HR department and legal team to protect myself, that’s how “easy” and costly it is.

    You adopted five kids. Impressive. Hat off to you, but this doesn’t make you a good person, or even holy. I know it must take a ton of work and time to do it right……and I am assuming you are.

  175. seventiesjason says:

    Go shovel some more snow Scott 😉

  176. Oscar says:

    @ seventiesjason says:
    March 14, 2019 at 5:33 pm

    Where do I start Oscar, I have disagreed with you many times over the years here…you fly into a ‘roid rage about how “wrong” I always am. Your actions towards me have demonstrated that you do have a perfect marriage, and that I am indeed stupid compared to you.

    Start by answering the question. Why do you feel the need to lie about me? Why do you feel the need to lie at all? I’ve never stated that I have a perfect marriage, nor have I ever called you stupid. Why do you feel the need to lie?

    Men like you have made it impossible for me to adopt.

    I did not state that you should adopt, nor have I done anything to stop you from doing anything. I stated that I provided a father for fatherless children by adopting.

    If you want to provide a father for fatherless children by following Pastor Parkison’s advice, and marrying a single mother, then go do so. No one’s stopping you.

  177. okrahead says:

    Jason,
    Parkison, in the article in question teaches:
    1: Unmarried women who have bastard children through willing fornication who are now believers are as pure as Christ and better than any man deserves. Heresy and blasphemy, as previously discussed.
    2: Unmarried women can have sex without benefit of marriage and still be sexually pure; he divorces virginity from sexual purity. Heresy (Rev 2)
    3: He openly mocks young Christian men who strive to maintain sexual purity and teaches that their efforts are futile and useless. Heresy
    4: Parkison states that the idea of expecting your wife to be a virgin before marriage is “flat out not biblical.” Heresy, and a blatant lie.

  178. Scott says:

    Shoveling snow is infinitely more entertaining than watching this conversation unfold…again.

  179. Frank K says:

    The reality is, in the church……most men are gonna have to marry the “single mom” because there will be no other choice.

    They can also choose to not marry, But yeah, a lot of guys are so thirsty that they do it. And after she frivorces him and takes him to the cleaners he’ll be single again, get to see the kids once a month and be a lot poorer too.

    Then again, the marriage rate is in free fall, so maybe young men are wising up?

  180. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Oscar, Jason isn’t lying about you. He believes what he says. And so he might be wrong, but not lying.

    He’s in a painful place, frustrated by his loneliness. And so he misinterprets what he hears, and lashes out.

  181. seventiesjason says:

    You do have a blog about that Scott (snow)….I grew up in the northeast…snow won’t be entertaining after a few winters up there. It’s 73 here in my neighborhood of northern California today. Going for a walk as soon as I get out of this office. It was a very slow day today. In the next ten years….jobs like mine will be gone. Preparing for that day now by trying to save and invest more.

    Though I must mention no said “getting laid” until you did btw……it’s cool.

    As if a prayer was answered……….I got a book in the mail on Friday. It was from my former Corps Officer about a man named Dietrich Bonhoeffer. His life…his times……..what he did….you know about him. I won’t insult your intelligence….

    I started to read it, and it was just what I did indeed need. I couldn’t put it down. Finished it Sunday night.

    What an interesting man. A loner. Talented in areas…..but nothing like his brother, or father…..or his sister….who were stark geniuses compared to him.

    God used him in the end in a way that did calm and soothe some raw nerves. He would be a soyboy by classification by all the men here. He would be labeled a beta by just about everyone who is a real man today in the ‘sphere. He didn’t set out to prove theology or his Faith. He lived it, and paid a very bitter price for it in the end that most could never or would never endure.

    The torture at the hands of NAZIs…….especially of their own was especially cruel, and must have been a pain physically that most would never endure………he had the greatest ideas to live for…..and he paid a price, but wrote himself into history….and not for greatness of his education, his times or life………….but what he stood for.

    A bachelor too.

    So yeah. It gave me some perspective on things that’s all.

    Oscar….I believe you should only be allowed to have *one* cup of coffee 😉

  182. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Well, this marriage is off to a good start: https://metro.co.uk/video/groom-slaps-newlywed-wife-shocked-wedding-guests-1877686/

    Groom slap bride at wedding.

  183. The Knightfly says:

    So…..if these single mothers are so great, then why don’t these pastors marry them? Not being vain there, are you, pastors?

    Tell you what, pastors. You marry those single mothers, tell your sons to marry them, get the preacherboys from the seminary to marry them, and maybe I’ll not think of you bad hypocrites of the worst sort.

  184. 7817 says:

    Scott’s rule of Dalrock comment threads.

    Given enough time and comments, all Dalrock post threads devolve into a discussion about why Jason can’t get laid.

    Hahaha

    All of the feminine “look at me!!!!”

    With none of the tits.

  185. Scott says:

    Jason, contrary to conventional wisdom, I didn’t get married so I could read Bible verses to Mychael.

  186. vandicus says:

    “Let’s not pretend now – after 2,000 years of church history – that adoption is discouraged by the God who adopted us. We’re Christians, not Muslims.”

    Never said it was discouraged, just said it was generally a bad idea for people. We aren’t all cut out to teach either, which is something the Bible explicitly warns us about.

    My figuring is, if adoption was something that should be broadly practiced, at the same level as other things we’re asked to do, there would’ve been at least a positive recommendation made at some point, included probably around the same point with widows and orphans. How common is the practice of returning adopted children for instance?

  187. seventiesjason says:

    I don’t know where I inferred that you did Scott……..and if I did….I apologize.

    7817……how “christian” of you, maybe you should use your amazing Game n Frame on me to “put me in line” then so I won’t “misbehave” lol

  188. seventiesjason says:

    RPL…..lonely? Yeah. It’s terrible.

    As for Osacr…..he is the one who lashes out if you really take a step back and look. Over the years I post something, he’ll reply and pretty much do it to make me stupid. He has the problem. I don’t really on this issue.

    He was the guy who would flush my head down the toileyt in the locker room, and then on the follwoing Sunday be the guy at the pulpit reading scripture all more ‘holy’ than the rest of with a choirboy image.

    He seems to be pretty dedicated to his family, his worklife and his education he just thinks he is better than people he can bully and get away with it. I at one time was afraid of guys like him, dealt with them my whole life….and then realized about six months ago in this situation…….men like him have to bully, and outright be a douche to someone they percieve as weaker or lesser. Scott probably could answer it in a better way than I ever could.

    Doesn’t matter in the end.

  189. Scott says:

    Jason, not you in particular

    Rollo has been saying (I’m paraphrasing) something like “I’m still amazed that Christians manage to procreate” pretty regularly.

    I tend to agree.

    I have been critical of game as a Christian for several reasons, including what looks like its inherent dishonesty to get more sex.

    I asses it to be sonewhere between the “chicks like assholes” speech that every young man should get from his older brothers or dad and a trained monkey dance that is being peddled to men to help them trick their wives into being turned on by them.

    However the underlying principles of attraction are sound. And they are true for all humans. It’s kind of like how the circulatory, respiratory and digestive systems work the same even after you become a Christian.

    I am no alpha male. But I got the speech from my brothers. When I became single and was back at church in my thirties I realized how unconcerned I needed to be about the competition as soon as I walked in the room. Straight beta orbiter game across the board. I just wasn’t able to articulate it then.

    So the question is, did you not get the speech?

  190. new anon (longtime reader, seldom commenter NYC) says:

    @ Oscar [March 14, 2019 at 8:32 am]

    replying to Scott’s comment (All of this, by the way is why I don’t assent to dating as an appropriate form of mate selection for my kids. It’s all sin covered up by formatting to make it look “romantic” or whatever.):

    “I agree. But that would be a lot easier to avoid in an environment where your kids grow up with a group of kids who all attend the same church, whose families you know, where all the adults have been friends for years, ideally even grew up together, etc.

    In other words, it’s a lot easier to do living in a community, which is a rare thing these days.

    For example, my oldest daughters just turned marriageable age, and I don’t know any of the young men in church. None. Not one. How am I supposed to screen them, if I don’t even know them?”

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Call me captain obvious, but wouldn’t a good starting point be to reach out to the families of the eligible young men, by inviting over for BBQ, dinner, brunch etc, to get to know one another. Unless you go to a church that regularly has over 100 folks in attendance, there really is no reason why you shouldn’t know at least something about everyone in the congregation. If the young men are adult converts or otherwise come to church by themselves (without their parents or relatives) you could try to get to know them directly in smaller group settings connected to official or unofficial church events/settings.

    When I was in my 20s, I attended a small church plant/startup a few blocks away from Ground Zero in NYC, and a group of us single guys always made it a point to get families and some of the older folk included in any of our after church lunches, dinners, hangouts – really anything we did. That type of environment has to be cultivated and it takes work, but it is worth pursuing. Not just to be able to selfishly get your daughters married off, but to share your gifts with the body of Christ, and to grow in unity.

    Part of the problem is that the culture at large is becoming more and more atomized and hyper individualistic. Aaron Renn has written about the troubles of trying to create community in a culture that is openly hostile at any that smells of a “thick” community (google his excellent piece on this – search term: Masculinist #26: The Fall of the Household).

    Again – we are all swimming against the tide, and this is not easy, but it is important and necessary work. My 2 cents from NYC.

  191. 7817 says:

    So the question is, did you not get the speech?

    No, I didn’t, at least not straight out that way. But there were enough clues I should’ve figured out out before the manosphere

  192. Scott says:

    I should modify

    “Straight beta orbiter + Bible verses” game

  193. Bee says:

    Jason, Red Pill Latecomer, Oscar,

    I am not aware of any other commenter here, and over at Deep Strength blog, that has been offered as much help, by as many different guys as Jason.

    I now believe that OSCAR has the CORRECT approach to helping Jason. When Jason throws out his wild and false accusations; demand proof, or an apology!

    The rest of us, stop coddling Jason.

  194. seventiesjason says:

    Well Scott you bring up something interesting.

    No, I never got the speech. My older brother has DOwns Syndrome with severe health complications. As a teen before I went to West Germany for a year as an exchange student (1986-1987 I was builled so badly the previous year…..my parents decided to send me out)…..and then off to prep school when I returned late summer 1987. I was expected to help care for my older brother……we were always at the doctor, a hospital…he was alwways sick, or had something else wrong with him.

    The family I lived with in West Germany (West Berlin) were an older couple. Their son was 27 at the time. Their daughter was 32. I was an “only child” in their home. It was a critical age to be overseas (16 / 17) and alone. I went to Stadt Gymasium. I got really homesick that Christmas of 1986. This was before the Internet as you know….and phone calls were crystal clear but very, very expensive. I spoke with my parents three times that whole year on the phone. Briefly.

    My German peers were the same age as me in school…but so much more “adult” and “wordly” at that time. They drank. They smoked. They had sex. I did grow three inches that year. I did see Reagan at the Wall give his most famous speech “Mr. Gorbachev! Tear Down This Wall!” and it was Berlins 750 Birthday that year……the city was awash in festivities all year. It was a positive experience.

    My father never gave me a talk or a speech….because I know for a fact that if he had been born at the time I was….he would have been a lifelong single. My mother was the second woman he ever dated. They met when she was 18, and he was 30.

    No, I never got a speech….and the stuff I picked up from peers was “puffed talk” or inocrrect.

    The man-o-sphere stuff is really insulting to you if you have questions, and it looks trite at my age trying to navigate and comprehend it. I have to accept “it just didn’t work out” and as painful, unfair and hurtful as it is……well, it’s a reality

  195. seventiesjason says:

    Bee…..his rage at me for anything I say is really his problem. Not mine. It’s not an approach, its being a turd.

    Also bee, in my conversation with Oscar….I wasn’t asking advice

  196. Novaseeker says:

    So the question is, did you not get the speech?

    I think a lot of guys didn’t, based on a combination of (1) absent fathers (i.e., no father in home), (2) pushover fathers dominated by mother (bad example), (3) no brothers, (4) brother lost in space, (5) no sisters to observe closely and/or sisters were not attractive so no chance to observe attractive women at young ages up close, (6) endless programming to be beta in school, society, life in general (especially important when 1 through 5 are also present, meaning social influence has no real counter).

    All of those things means a lot of lost guys.

    Some guys come from situations like that and are very observant and learn anyway — they are unusually perceptive individuals who need less modeling to imitate. Throughout history, the model for males was, as you say, mentoring/imitation. But that only works when there are males around to imitate and/or the males around are worth imitating. Both are lacking, and have been for a few decades now, hence a lot of lost guys.

  197. ray says:

    Adoption —

    I have what could be termed an adopted son. Of a multi-married mother. But adopted In no civil sense, of course. Ain’t the State’s business who I adopt or not.

    There are many ways to contribute to the lives of boys in America, a thing they desperately need and want. At least until the age when they just become permanently pissed/criminal due to lack of masculine — and especially fatherly — guidance. This is not by accident, and many benefit thereby, on the grief and loss of others.

    I was careful not to become entangled with his mother legally or sexually, and usually great physical distance separated us. My experience with such a largely spiritual adoption was tremendously positive and rewarding, and I recommend it, but only to Christian men sufficiently aware of modern culture/females, which means not many. In the process of protecting him you musn’t make yourself a prey. You know how this world is.

  198. Anon says:

    Bee,

    I am not aware of any other commenter here, and over at Deep Strength blog, that has been offered as much help, by as many different guys as Jason.

    He doesn’t want help – he wants pity and interaction. He is a rare male with ‘nail girl’ psychology :

  199. seventiesjason says:

    You know Anon, you’re right…..I need interaction and your fixation on posting this video on every thread demonstrates your own inner self projection and just your vile hatred of people

  200. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Regarding Carly Schroeder:

    She’s undergone numerous training courses and is interested in working in military intelligence after she completes Officer Candidate School, she says.

    So she’ll being her military career as an officer? In military intelligence? A nice desk job, complete with an officer’s uniform and (eventually) medals.

    She announced her move in February, writing on Instagram, “For 22 years, I’ve played dress up for a living. As an actress …

    She’s still playing dress up.

  201. BillyS says:

    Spike,

    A male’s biological role finished at conception.

    Not quite true. Having your own genes someplace makes a connection you don’t seem to realize. I would also expect a spiritual component.

    Though pairing a man with an existing mother & child does not have that same element. A man may care deeply about the child, but it is completely outside of biology as you note. (Except possibly in levirate marriage, where it is the man’s brother’s child.)

  202. BillyS says:

    Opus,

    I have met several people who were adopted that loved their adopted parents deeply. One specifically despised his birth dad (rich, but uncaring in his view (not due to the adoption, but due to the bio-father’s character)).

    I do believe my son sees me as a father now, as much as he can. His siblings do not, so your point is valid in many cases, just not all of them.

  203. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    Did your daughter ever want you to know any of the young men at church? I bet she didn’t want you involved with them at all. (I could be wrong of course.)

    That said, churches should involve young men with the fathers of potential wives. But churches do a lousy job meeting any needs for single men to connect, so the fact they blow it here too is not surprising, unfortunately.

    Jason,

    You are correct. Joseph was a faithful stepfather, as far as we are told. (I see nothing to indicate otherwise as well.)

    Though Mary had Jesus because of Divine intervention, not because she was sexually active. Comparing modern single mothers is also completely wrong.

    A widow would be the only case where marrying a single mother with child would have merit in general, but even that is a road with great potential bumps. It would fit with Paul’s admonition for younger widows to remarry. Though a widow who later married and divorced is a huge risk. So just being a widow is not enough.

    Deti,

    Though David (for all his other good points) knew so little about Meph that he believed Meph’s servant’s lie that Meph hoped to restore Saul’s dynasty when Absalom rebelled. David was not a good father, unfortunately, though that was a bit off your point.

  204. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    I would expect Joseph didn’t realize that Jesus was God incarnate, just as it took the Resurrection and infilling with the Spirit for the disciples to realize many things. I have no idea what feelings of doubt he had, since none are written, but I expect any were the magnified versions of those most fathers face, except that Jesus didn’t go through a rebellious phase.

    I am convinced the “common wisdom” was that Jesus came about from a Roman soldier raping Mary, which would explain what the Pharisees said later. I have heard Chuck Missler talk about it, though I can’t recall exactly which of his teachings covered that. (He covered the entire Bible in focused teachings generally.)

    That kind of gossip likely did bite all involved, but it is part of the real world.

    Oscar,

    Adoption is much harder today for the same reason that marriage is harder. Society will undermine honest men who seek to do well at the drop of a hat. False accusations get quicker belief than anything else, completely undermining many that be successful adoptions. Normal teen issues, combined with things like reactive attachment disorder, can completely blow up a family just like wifely angst and false accusations can blow up a marriage, even causing a man to be thrown in jail at times.

    A really tragic part of this is the same churches that push adoption can turn on a dime against those who adopt. This is just like those claiming to support marriage can undermine it when a woman cries and makes claims that seem horrid.

  205. BillyS says:

    What kind of guy wants to have sex with a woman with other men participating too? That is flat out repulsive….

  206. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    The comment about Romney was not for you. It was for our pal InnocentBystanderBoston (sp?) who posts here sometime and had proclaimed that Romney was “just great” a long time back. I think I was not commenting at that time.

    Your later involvement in the thread went against the initial post and you seem to be participating instead of just complaining. That is a good thing, at least in my view. (Not that I am the one to please, I just like productive conversation, even disagreement, rather than just complaining.)

    I fell a bit behind and just replied to some and jumped ahead.

  207. Anon says:

    jason squeaked :

    and your fixation on posting this video on every thread demonstrates your own inner self projection and just your vile hatred of people

    What does this even mean? ‘Hatred of people’? How, pray tell?

    I am actually saving the time of solid brothers who get trapped into interacting with you. You abuse their generosity.

  208. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I think the Talmud says that Mary was the “whore” of a Roman soldier, and that Jesus was their “bastard” son. I’ve never heard any claims of Mary being raped.

  209. Bee says:

    Many decades ago there were very few single moms because most of them were strongly encouraged to put their children up for adoption. The church run adoption agencies of that era knew that the child growing up with two adopted parents was in for a better life than if they grew up in single bio-mom household.

  210. BillyS says:

    And society supported those adoptive parents Bee. They did not constantly undermine them by asking about the child’s “real mom” and taking any small failure as a sign the adoption was a failure.

  211. seventiesjason says:

    Billy…you guys hate disagreement here. I was put in my place rather quickly.

  212. seventiesjason says:

    I was even called a liar, a nail girl, wasting peoples times here, turning the thread into about me getting laid……..

    and I did nothing of the sort in this thread……….I spoke about adoption (was corrected). About Joesphe (was corrected, told I was wrong), tried to see beyond the fluffiness of Parkinson (was told I was wrong). I tried to convey that a pudgy overweight man in a pic from 1925 was not neccessarily oozing raw masculinity (I was told I was wrong)

    So……like I have said before…..it depends on who is “sayin’ it”

    I could have a solid insight here, and it would pounced upon about how “wrong” it is. Anyone else would say the same thing……and its “deep and meaningful”

    So, I know a plenty of of you just don’t like me. I am not really fond of most you either.

  213. Scott says:

    The ideal is:

    Married mom and dad living with the children that are the natural product of their union (biological kids). This in conjunction with living in a civilization that is Christian and does everything it can to support this family structure.

    Since we live in a fallen world, all other forms of family, while not ideal, can be made whole through Christ.

    It’s not hard to understand.

  214. Scott says:

    Having an ideal, and encouraging people to strive for it does not mean you “hate” anyone or their family.

  215. squid_hunt says:

    @Oscar

    I agree with BIlly’s general implication. Your focus is on your daughter. She should know what your expectations and ground rules are. That may be difficult if she is already in her late teens, but if you expect to meet the man before he gets close to your daughter, you’re going to get her on board.

  216. thedeti says:

    at least there is a call by this Parkinson fellow who understands that a child needs a father…

    What a single mom (divorced or never married) should do is change herself. She should realize her situation – she brings little other than baggage, burden, expense, and obligation to a potential relationship. She should bring humility and quiet. She should throw herself on the mercy of any man who would take her on. She should make any and all concessions he demands, including sending the child to live with his/her father or other relatives for a time. She is not in a position to make demands, or at least should not be.

    And pastors like Parkison need to stop exalting single mothers, stop lying about their nature, and stop shaming men for balking at taking them on. Single mothers are not “as pure as the sinless son of God”. Her righteousness in God does NOT require men to overlook her past.

    You can be damn sure she won’t be overlooking HIS past. You can be damn sure she will be evaluating and screening him just as hard as she possibly can to make sure he ticks off as many boxes as possible. A single mom presenting herself for possible marriage to a man not the father of her child should be similarly scrutinized.

    If single moms want to marry, they need to humble themselves before God and the men they would seek to have pay their way from here on out. The men they ask to take on their baggage. The men they demand to start filling the role of “Father figure” for their bastards. These women are not exalted. They are not special. They are not heroes. They do not occupy some higher moral plane than other mere mortals. They are just women. They are just human beings.

    And their status as single mothers lowers, not raises, their market values. Pastors and other white knights lying to women and shaming men about this isn’t changing it. Single moms are responding to this with ever more shrill calls for men to “man up ” and “step up”. Men are responding by simply leaving, walking away, and not listening. “Tuning out and dropping out”, if you will.

    As a practical matter all it’s really doing is pushing marriage out even further. Because let’s face it – most of these baby mamas will marry, because (1) they’ll finally lower their standards far enough; and (2) the thirst gets so incredibly bad for a mid to late 30s man, and the social pressure and shaming from his church community gets so oppressive, that he finally can take it no longer, so he breaks down and marries up the single mom or the “reformed slut” when he’s 40 and she’s 37 or 38, and all the problems that those marriages entail.

  217. thedeti says:

    I didn’t get “the speech”. As everyone here knows, I had a dad who was alpha at work and hopeless beta at home; domineering mother with pushover dad, no brothers, unattractive sisters, and no other men around i was allowed to interact with.

    Whenever I got a smattering of “the speech”, i was always redirected away from it with blistering shaming language and threats of perpetual virginity and social/professional ostracism.

  218. Scott says:

    Since I am a step dad, Mychael and I are humbled and required to look within ourselves at couples who have, despite this wretched culture obtained the ideal.

    We are aware of the awkwardness and statistically significant challenges the oldest one faces. We look at our friends with long term intact nuclear families and say to ourselves “they did it right. How do we emulate that model from this point forward?”

    Mychael has written about that humbling experience from the single mom point of view on the Russian faith article which has some very telling remarks in the comments section.

    There are one or two traditional Christians on there but the consensus from the commenters is that a woman’s past, right up the second she meets you is none of your damn business. Especially if it is of s sexual nature.

    Mychael chose the repentance/humbling herself model (in relation to me).

    Folks can assess for themselves which model works better.

  219. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    Billy…you guys hate disagreement here. I was put in my place rather quickly.

    You can’t truly read here and think we have no disagreements. Come on Jason.

  220. BillyS says:

    The problem today is also that nothing keeps the woman in such a humble situation if she doesn’t want to be. That is what caught me. I didn’t get what I thought when I married. My wife was much more rebellious in her heart even then than I realized.

  221. Scott says:

    There are folks on these boards that I have had significant disagreements with and would still like to meet them, if not in this life, in heaven one day.

    BillyS is one of them, in fact. So the argument about disagreement is just silly.

  222. thedeti says:

    There are one or two traditional Christians on there but the consensus from the commenters is that a woman’s past, right up the second she meets you is none of your damn business. Especially if it is of s sexual nature.

    And men should start shutting that down right away.

    If I am a single man, and ANY woman, not just a single mother, is requesting or demanding commitment from me, I have a right to know whatever I want to know about her, and to discover it through any legal means necessary.

    This woman demands that I give her unfettered access to the full fruits of my labor. All my money, time, labor, attention, resources, and sexual fidelity. Everything I am, everything I produce, everything i own, everything I ever will own. She is demanding i give to her a legal claim over all of that.

    So, uh, yes, this woman’s past is very much my business. Her sexual past is very much my business. Anything about this woman that I decide is my business, is my business. I have a right to know it. I have a right to full disclosure. I have a right to know what she’s “selling” and what I will be “purchasing” with literally my entire GDP for my entire life. Particularly since she will be putting me in the scales to make sure that I measure up to her expectations. So it’s a little disingenuous and presumptuous to say that I don’t get to do the same.

  223. squid_hunt says:

    You have every right to be discriminatory about who you date and marry. The argument that you can’t dismiss a woman for getting pregnant out of wedlock is no different than a tranny saying you’re wrong for not dating them because they weren’t born a woman. Some fruitcake pastor lusting after all the young harlots in his church has no say on who you marry.

  224. wodansthane says:

    @ Charles B
    @ Anonymous Reader

    Thanks for the feedback, and the correction. Does that mean that I also failed when I identified Parkinson as a feminist instead of a woman? Seriously, I’ve only been “Rollo’d” about 9 mos, and “Dalrocked” about 7, plus I’m and old guy with a lot to unlearn/learn. You two, plus several others have helped immensely in my education. Regards

  225. Warthog says:

    “Interestingly the Bible doesn’t seem to recommend adoption at any point(though it does encourage caring for widows and orphans). Possibly because of the innate risks making it generally a bad idea.”

    The Bible presents the Gospel as being adopted as sons by God the Father. I could not think of any higher example. “For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.””

    Under Roman law, when a child was born, if his father refused to see him or touch him, the infant was placed out on the doorstep. The early church grew demographically under the pagan Roman empire because Christians adopted abandoned infants en masse for three centuries.

    I should clarify my earlier comments about marrying a single mother and adopting the bastard. In all but one of the cases I’ve seen, it worked out badly. However, I’ve seen many cases of families that adopted orphans after their own children were teenagers. Virtually all of those cases went quite well, with one exception.

    The exception was a family that adopted some Russian siblings from an orphanage, and the oldest was a girl who was 13 and apparently had been pimped out while in the orphanage. She turned into a “poison ivy” trying to seduce the adopted siblings. They eventually had to send her away.

    I suspect that the toxic dynamic that occurs when a man adopts the child of a single-mom is because that child is her first-born. She will tend to defend him from the discipline of her husband even if the husband adopted her bastard.

    When a family who already has children adopts an orphan, that dynamic doesn’t exist. Both the mother and father are new to the orphan. And as there is no question about whether he is first-born or not, the orphan tends to fit into the hierarchy looking up to the older siblings.

    I think that adoption is an amazing gift, and a wonderful thing to do. But adopting the first-born child of a single-mother is likely to end in failure.

  226. Bee says:

    Mark Driscoll is another Christian Leader that has encouraged Christian men to marry single moms.

    I think a better policy for Churches and Leaders would be to go go back to encouraging single moms to put their kids up for immediate adoption.

  227. Pingback: What if we acknowledged repentance and respected Christian men who married single mothers? | Dalrock

  228. Charles B says:

    @wodansthane,

    No, you were correct, just limiting the application (IMO). Feminist thought in all forms is either female thinking (the source), or gynocentric Male thinking (the willing slave of the source) that does not understand women in reality. So Parkison *is* a feminist, but what he’s showing here is specifically female thinking. You can tell because it elevates women’s choices to sin as actually pure intent, and good in essential nature.

    A typical gynocentric Male would say it’s a “tragedy” that they’re single, but blame their choice, moral failure, or just the bad temporal consequences on men.

    And glad to have you aboard! I’m still learning myself, as I’m a (kind of) young married father. I’ve just been soaking up these ideas for a bit.

  229. BillyS says:

    I would agree Scott.

  230. Anon says:

    Jason said :

    I am not really fond of most you either.

    And yet, you won’t leave..

  231. Oscar says:

    seventiesjason on March 15, 2019 at 9:04 am

    “I was even called a liar…”

    That’s because you lied, Jason. You lied when you claimed that I claimed to have a perfect wife. You lied when you claimed that I claimed to have a perfect life. You lied when you claimed that I called you stupid.

    I never wrote any of those things.

    If you don’t want me to point out your lies, stop lying about me.

    Alternately, you could provide quotes in which I made such claims.

    Of course, you can’t, because I never wrote any of those things, and you know it, which means that you lied.

    Why do you feel the need to lie, Jason?

  232. Oscar says:

    “You can’t truly read here and think we have no disagreements. Come on Jason. ~ Billy”

    No one can read here, and honestly think we have no disagreements, but one can lie about it.

  233. ray says:

    Deti —

    Looks like Bobby Jones, Gene Sarazen, etc. in photo. Dig the plus-fours.

    Physiognomy is quite real, esp. later in a man’s life. After fifty years of Femistan, many men no longer look/act like men, and the celebrity ‘pastors’ are fine examples thereof. They are weak men that females, collectively, place in charge of institutions (church, courts, etc.) to control and beat-down the strong and masculine men who inevitably would oppose their feminized churches and cultures.

    Strong men don’t do totalitarianism. Both the Sisterhood and their male enablers know that.

  234. ray says:

    I put about as much faith and effort in the Talmud as I do the Koran.

  235. toocrazy2yoo says:

    Divorced/single mothers don’t deserve a decent guy to marry. They already blew it. They should tear up their marriage card until the kids are up and out. I tore up my hubby card after my ex’s not haaaaapy-spasm. I’d have NEVER married a single mother. What kid of man does THAT, cleaning up some failed-wife’s messes. You date single mothers, sleep with them. You don’t MARRY them and you don’t get involved with their kids. You aren’t Mike Brady.

  236. Anon says:

    Oscar,

    Why do you feel the need to lie, Jason?

    Again, he thrives off of a certain type of interaction. Not all obsessive attention-seekers are female.

  237. Oscar says:

    @ ray
    on March 15, 2019 at 2:08 pm

    I put about as much faith and effort in the Talmud as I do the Koran.

    I’m not sure which of those two is worse.

  238. Oscar says:

    @ Anon
    on March 15, 2019 at 7:13 pm

    Again, he thrives off of a certain type of interaction. Not all obsessive attention-seekers are female.

    Even if that’s the case, there’s no need to lie about people.

  239. Hank Flanders says:

    I agree with what The Question said earlier about Parkison’s article being for women and not men in the same way Matt Walsh’s article, “Dear Single Dudes, it’s time to man up” that first led me to the manosphere was five years ago and not just for virtue signaling nature of it but also for the fact that it uses female language and extrapolation. That is, Parkison repeatedly uses the word “entitled,” but it’s actually women who usually use that word in regards to how men are not “entitled” to their affection. Of course, men aren’t entitled to that from women (except within marriage in which the wife can also rightly expect it from her husband) but I’ve rarely heard it said it actually said within Christian circles or anywhere that men are entitled to love, sex, or marriage from a woman just for doing or not doing certain things. In contrast, women consistently tell and write to each other about getting the “man,” “career,” “love life,” or whatever that they “deserve,” and these faulty exhortations are often directed to generic audiences of women, so it’s implied the women just deserve to have these standards met just for breathing.

    I also think Parkison is in error regarding the way he’s using Ephesians 5:22-31, because his description of marriage being a “display of the gospel” and moreover, marriage to a single mother potentially being a greater display, sounds like he’s implying that being married is holier than not being married so that the gospel can be “displayed.” If we know that Paul described that one who is married shall have trouble in the flesh, can we not also infer that Paul would likely describe that one who marries a fornicator who has a bastard child would also have trouble in the flesh and probably that much more? Did Paul ever say or imply that one was holier for taking on marriage so that they can “display the gospel?” My reading is that Paul stated that one who doesn’t marry does better than one who does. I see no implication in Corinthians or anywhere else that one who chooses to add trouble to his or her life by getting married and having kids does better or is holier than one who doesn’t so that they can “display the gospel.”

  240. Pingback: Never forget the eager role of the conservative anvil. | Dalrock

  241. Peter Vincini says:

    Another serious issue not mentioned by you or Parkinson is the child’s biological father. Everything for his interference in raising the child to child support to the wife’s relationship with him can strain the marriage.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.