Flower, keys, pad, morning
I’m aware that in the manosphere and tradosphere we often criticize the modern situation. Which is simply horrible: the most sensitive rule our conversations and the most immoral decide what actions are acceptable. There is a degradation of trust within society and this is starting to affect businesses and government where the effort required to audit and check is increasing and our lives are increasingly regulated and criminalized (the regulations and laws are unjust and immoral).
When a woman has a husband who works hard to provide for his family, is engaged in the life of his kids, is committed to fidelity, who loves the Lord and she can barely find anything good to say about him without being prodded first., that is despicable to me. I used to get angry about it, but now I feel a sense of sorrow as I recognize that this is cultural. Many women have no idea what it is to respect and offer praise to their husbands because they’ve never seen it modeled. Ever.
But let us consider for a second how Deti analyzed the situation within the church, and how young women and young men are taught. I have shortened the comment a bit to emphasize the logic, and how it leads to contempt.
It’s being asserted that every one of these points has a basis in Scripture, Scripture is being twisted and distorted to support the feminine imperative. And Scripture is used because you cannot argue with it or disagree with it. In this context, pastors bludgeon men with “Scripture is the infallible Word of God” and is “Given by God, good for teaching, instruction, rebuke and reproof”. So, the argument from the pastor is, if you disagree with any of this, then you are disagreeing with God, calling Him a liar, putting yourself above God, committing blasphemy, and blaspheming the Holy Spirit (which is the only unpardonable sin). So therefore, since there are scriptural bases for all of this, God is right, you are wrong, and you better shape up, man up and “get in line and agreement with God’s Word”.
Below are a series of assertions and the scripture I’ve seen used and its original meanings distorted. Note these are all taken out of context, or divorced from their original meanings, or devoid of any theological support:
- –irls are “daughters of the King” and “God’s special princesses” (Song of Solomon, Psalm 45)
- “born again” virgins: (Christ’s instruction to Nicodemus that one must be “born again” to enter God’s kingdom; Paul’s statement that “if any one be in Christ, he is a new creation, behold, all things are made new”)
- Husband is responsible for wife’s sins, failings and substandard conduct: (“As Christ is the Head of the Church, so the man is the head of the wife”)
- Husband’s sacrificial love is unconditional even to the point of death: (“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her” Ephesians 5)
- Husbands are to love even in the face of the wife’s lack of submission/respect: (Ephesians 5, because the husband is to be “Christlike”)
Girls are brought up in the church as “Daughters of the King” and “God’s special little princesses”. They are told they are the fairer sex, the weaker sex, the purer sex. Girls and women are pure, noble, altruistic, and good. (Boys are tainted, fallen, base, self-serving and bad.)
Girls are entitled to special treatment, deference, and nurturing. (Boys are on their own.)
In dating, girls are expected to date only Christian boys and certainly not to have sex. But she is entitled to princess treatment. He must pay for everything, be a gentleman, hold her chair, open her doors. She is not to settle for any man. She must only marry the man whom God has selected for her. Since God is “perfect and makes no mistakes,” the man He selects for her will also be perfect. God is all powerful and all knowing, so He can and will do it and knows exactly what to do and when to do it for her. God is also “not a man and therefore does not lie.” This means God’s chosen man for her will meet her every qualification and requirement. If a particular man does not meet even one requirement, however minuscule or slight, he is not The One, and the man is auto-dumped. (She has no agency, no ability to choose, no free will, no decisionmaking ability and in fact no reason or need to make any decisions. She merely needs to …. exist.)
…
In marriage, scripture is twisted to serve the feminine imperative. If she has moral failings, it is the man’s fault. If she is unhappy in her marriage or their marriage is not working, it is ultimately his fault. (“Christ is the head of the church, so the man is the head of the wife.”) If something is wrong, it is all traceable to the head, who is the man.
…
Wifely submission/respect is purely conditional, but these conditions are never met. Somehow, she is always relieved of this obligation. Yet, the husband’s obligation to love is unconditional because he is to be like Christ, who is Perfection personified, and he is to die for her and give himself up for her “as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her”. The argument is “after all, Christ loved the church and hung on the Cross even though we humans hated him, spat on him, and crucified him! So you have to love me and die for me even if I’m a bitch who hates you, maltreats you and won’t have sex with you, because that’s what Christ did and YOU HAVE TO BE LIKE CHRIST!!”
If any one or more of the following is happening or has ever happened, she considers that she does not have to submit or respect the husband:
- she considers him in any way deficient in leading (“because he’s not leading the family”)
- he sins or has any kind of imperfection (so “he does not lead me into sin”)
- he doesn’t attend church or doesn’t like it (because he’s not “right with God”)
- he looked at porn, or masturbated, or pushes for sex (because “he’s leading me into sin”)
- he isn’t loving or kind (because “he has an obligation to show sacrificial love FIRST, and THEN AND ONLY THEN do I have an obligation to submit/respect”)
Now, I am not saying men should sin. Men are moral creatures, and accountable to God. But the subtext of this teaching is that men are contemptible. But the teaching has consequences. Men learn, at a very young age, that they have to clean their own mess up. If you are nasty, you will find yourself at the bottom of the scrum: you will not have allies. And woe betide you if you snark back at your sister. I’m not sure if girls are taught that what they do and how they act have consequences, but they do. This comment is in the context of women fighting and yelling at their husbands.
It’s like pulling the fire alarm – bells will go off, and fire engines are rolling…only to be told to go back to the fire station, again.
Eventually he has to leave, one way or another. He may walk out of the room, and walk around the block a few times. He may go drink alcohol to de-stress. He may go work in the yard, or lift at the gym. If he cannot do those things, then he will tend to “leave” by mentally checking out. He’s in the same room, but focused entirely on something that has nothing to do with the woman who yelled at him. He may well be actively ignoring her, because her presence is like fingernails down a chalkboard at that particular moment. Or, he may engage in what is called “displacement activity” – since he can’t solve the problem of the woman yelling at him – picking a fight he’s prohibited from engaging in – then he may go “fight” via a computer game, or watching sports, or playing sports, or arguing in comment boxes on blogs…
Why does this situation arise? Because he’s unsure of himself. Because if he does not believe he has authority to tell the yelling woman she should simmer down, and he’s unsure of just how far his anger may take him. Therefore, he has no other choice but to leave in some manner. The fear of himself does not have to be in terms of physical action. He may well be afraid of what he might say if he decides to up the ante by yelling back; because words mean things to most men, and there are words he’s surely thought of that may well be true but that would cut her to the quick. Just as he always holds his physical strength in check, generally he’s holding his verbal strength back as well
I will confess to arguing in comment boxes in blogs, lifting weights, and destructive weeding to displace anger. Because women (in particular) have been taught that their feelings count more than the facts: their feelings are facts, and any injustice that flows from that is of negligible cost.
But this, ladies, means three things.
The first is that the men will leave. We will not put up with being continually put down. (Yes, God hates divorce, and yes, you should stay together for the kids. But if she leaves, young man, you are able to live at peace). Not only your husbands, Ladies: you will lose your sons if you do not deal with this.
The second is that no one will tell you the truth. Your contempt and anger will shut you from correction. And correction is what we need. Here the Pick Up Artists have done men a service “Dude the reason you are not scoring is because you are overweight and a wimp. Hit the gym, change your diet, and go to Toastmasters, and approach 10 women a week!” And as we have changed how we eat and what we do, people react to us differently — particularly when our mind is also being renewed (so we do not end up sitting next to the PUA in the clinic or family court because we also have syphilis or have to support a new baby mama).
The third is that you cannot grow. If you make choices, you will err. You will sin. God can take our mistakes and even the wrong things we do and work them for good. Despite us. But if you do not own your evil, do not hold yourself to account, and instead say that it was all in the will of God or none of it was your fault, then you are never going to move to maturity. You are going to be tossed around by the fashions of each day.
And the fashions of this day are making nations bankrupt. They are making nations infertile. They are sapping the very confidence of a people at the very time that many nations have the technology to destroy each other and have to develop the confidence and strength to not do so.
Women are moral agents. They are loved by God, and at times have been called by God to do great things. But you cannot be a moral agent if you blame everyone else.
To men I say this: being a man is a good thing. God created men in his image. The anger and desire and energy men bring to situations leads to solutions and not whingeing. But we are not called to be women. Women have, in general, different virtues and flaws that we do. And we should not bow to any woman who considers that if we do not do things her way that is sexist, racist or harassing. If a guy did that, we would call it bullying. If a chick does that, the moral value is unchanged.
So stop being a princess, young lady. Young man, you should know not to aspire to be an upper class twit (ie. a prince) already. 
