Links and Comments #13

Some more of the things that I’ve read which interest me:


A great comment by Dalrock commenter Anonymous Age 71 describing the main heresy of marriage in Churchianity: Effective Male Leadership Initiates Female Submission. This is seen time and again in Churchianity to the point it’s been addressed several times on this blog and directly rebuked here.

The command for husbands to step-up and lead their families is a heretical Churchian command manufactured out of whole cloth from misapplication of Scripture. The command given is for wives to submit, no matter how much the Churchian proctors wish to ignore it. It is Scriptural to say that Effective Female Submission Initiates Male Leadership. This is confirmed by Peacefulwife here:

It takes a LONG time of seeing that his wife is seriously permanently respecting him and honoring his leadership before most husbands feel safe enough to lead. At first it is VERY confusing for them! You can read my husband’s story here

You can also read another husband’s take on how scary it is to try to start leading when his wife never had let him lead before, here.


It is useful to compare secular and churchian marriage advice to see how far off the church is even from the standards of the world. For instance, we have the defective churchian logic involving single dads. These are good illustrations of why repentance is needed. None of these figures are going to repent because they are too self-interested – the real action needs to come from those who are supporting these people.
Helen Smith’s doing the media tour for her book and has an article out about why men aren’t getting married.

She’s hit a nerve with some, too.


Some might be waiting to see what I have to say about the Supreme Court ruling redefining marriage to be acceptable among homosexuals, but it’s really all been said. When you render what is God’s to Caesar and trample all over it yourself, don’t be surprised when certain parties petition the State to do something you don’t want with marriage or the State declares you married without your consent. It should go without saying that Christians need to repent of their wickedness towards marriage, instead of blindly advocating Marriage 2.0 and wishing for the rapture or they’ll find what Amos wrote to be true.
Sis unfortunately came up a lot recently along with other supposed “Red Pill” and “Christian” women.

She would have men jumping up and down making fools of themselves (like a dog hopping up and down frantically for a treat, this video represents what traditional feminist women expect out of men in dating) in order to show themselves to be worthy enough for a woman’s presence. The second part of her post is rendered impossible anyway for driving his frame and value so far into a worthless place by the former. Regardless, the man is the prize, not the woman. I could say much more, but Rollo and Martel got it covered.

Then we have the case of a group of Red Pill women (Sis included specifically for the lengths that she went to advocate deception) advocating lying to another woman regarding her partner count, which were addressed by Free Northerner and DonalGraeme. Experiencing the consequences of these kinds of things or witnessing them is what bring men to go their own way.

I pray she genuinely repents.


allamagoosa writes on how riding horses taught her the Red Pill.

embraceyourfeminity writes on how women shouldn’t change men and how women test men.

Farm Boy compares smart phone contracts to Marriage 2.0.

Deti’s guide to the SMP/MMP (Part 1, Part 2) written in response to a Churchian woman-worshipper named Paul. Of course, all he served to do was anger the men and disgust the women with his ways.

The better way of dealing with porn in marriage than the Sheila Gregoire method of using it as a lever to gain the husband’s submission to the wife.

A testimony of the corporate boyfriend.

Traditional feminism promotes a neurotic vision of love.


Frustration happens for us all in this online world because we are people with real needs, feelings and desires. The stuff going on IRL can affect you online and just wear you thin, coupled with the stuff online (believe me I know). We might gain a sense of community, but at the same time, those that step out and provide content can often be dehumanized into a web site or youtube channel where people say the nastiest things of you that they would never say to anyone in person. Then people can simply be dehumanized into pixels on a screen formed into characters in e-mails, texts, and IMs. Heaven forbid you show an inclination to change how you do things or show a bit of weakness and let your frustration come out. Then the long knives come out. Stardusk found this out recently, after doing this video:

Most of this is just a reminder that there are humans on the other ends of these things. As with spreading any message, especially God’s message you got to spread the message and keep on keeping on, but it’s still stressful. Genuine words of encouragement are always useful in any case, IRL or online, for those that are under stress and might not see results in front of them each day.



That’s all for now. Finally, the famous Russell Brand video. Like him or not, he taught a master class on social interaction here. There is much one can learn on how he dealt with these people.

I’m Not A Cult of Personality

In seeing the instances of Churchianity that are out there, it seems there’s one thing that is in common to all of it:

People are revering and following after men, rather than following after God.

There are signs of these things all over the Churchian realms, even from the very beginning. It is written of Paul and Barnabas after the people tried to worship them:

Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out, And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: (Acts 14:14-15)

And of Peter:

And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man. (Acts 10:25-26)

The tendency of wicked man is to worship created things rather than the Creator is a paramount thing which separates men from God. It could even be said that this is the primary test laid upon those who accept the grace of Christ. As it is written of John and the angels:

And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (Revelation 19:9-10)

And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things. Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God. (Revelation 22:8-9)

Unfortunately, this simple admonition has been completely eliminated from the consciousness of most men. When all the representatives of Churchianity, even the ones that claim lineage to Paul and Peter miss this admonition, it makes a statement. It’s people putting themselves and other men, lifting them up as somehow better before other men and closer to God. It’s a natural part of the fallen nature, and a sad statement on Churchianity at large that the men themselves will do this, and others will accept them:

I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God. (3 John 9-11)

And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost. (Acts 12:21-23)

It should not be missed that the same things are written of the son of perdition, one who represents himself as God and desires worship of himself as God:

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. (2 Thess 2:3-4)

The message should be clear to worship God, follow Him and serve Him and no one else or nothing else, yet all of this seems to be missed repeatedly. When people follow after other men, they turn to the ones that please them the most. This tendency has been noted time and again:

For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. (Galatians 1:10)

The tendency of men after they select another man to follow is to turn it into a movement. This in turn eliminates any unity with the Spirit and body. It creates divisions, when the group divides up into sects or denominates itself. Again this occurred so early that Paul had to deal with it:

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:10-13)

Again, what is Paul, what is Apollos, what is Cephas but ordinary men who need the grace of Christ?

For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? (1 Corinthians 3:3-5)

Is this contention not what we have today in the staggering number of churches that denominate themselves outside of Christ? How is proclaiming that you follow Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Knox, or Smyth any different?

The directive today is literally to build up your own following, and build up the following of the movement. This has grown so commonplace that it is traditionalism at its core. While not intended as a direct response, this post already has driven up on the same block so might as drive on towards the house. Sola Scriptura doesn’t work with most people because they are bonded into division by these denominations and can not overcome them. They are not unified with the Spirit and do not generally act through the Spirit to interpret what they see. The proper and real binding authority, as Novaseeker puts it in denying His agency, is rightfully the Holy Spirit, not men.

Moreover, men are not locked into following after the Spirit and can grieve Him, not only in their lives but in their interpretation of Scriptures. Men can either conform to the Scriptures or seek to make the Scriptures conform to them. The pressures of the flesh and the world will always drive men away from Sola Scriptura into the arms of men. False teachers have always existed since the beginning, and it’s not coincidental that they feed into this sectarianism.

But to put aside the Spirit and desire a man instead as the arbiter in response to this sectarian disunity is disastrous. To deny the sufficiency of Scripture is to deny the sufficiency of Christ to justify, sanctify, and glorify His body. To deny the sufficiency of Scripture is to say that God’s right arm is too short. To deny the sufficiency of Scripture for a perceived lack of an arbiter is to deny the Holy Spirit and strip Him of His power.

I will say it time and again. I know I’m insufficient, but I know that Christ is all-sufficient for my needs. I know I am not worthy, therefore I need Christ. I know that all have sinned and fallen short just like me, so they need Christ too because they are not worthy. So why should I worship, follow, and revere them instead of Christ? Why should anyone worship, follow, or revere me? I am not Christ. There is only One that has walked this earth worthy of worship. I know it isn’t any of you. It isn’t me either. There is one figure that John fell on his face towards that didn’t rebuke him:

And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. (Revelation 1:17-18)

Follow Christ, Serve Christ, Love Christ. Lift Him up alone.

For those that are wondering about the title, this song rang through my head almost the whole time planning and writing this thing:

The Good and the Bad Look Alike

There are those that evidently think that it’s possible to separate “the good women” from “the bad women” when it comes to vetting them for marriage. They cry “don’t run away” and “don’t give up on women”, stating that “all you have to do is find the right woman”. They deny that the hand grenade analogy is applicable to women when it comes to marriage. While I typically don’t follow the news too closely for numerous reasons, I came across this interesting article describing some high-profile divorces.

It seems Rupert Murdoch filed for divorce from his wife Wendi Deng. The rumor has it that she got bored and unhaaaaapy and had an affair. For those that don’t know, Rupert Murdoch (worth about $11 billion at least until the divorce is final) owns Fox, Fox News, Sky News, and a whole bunch of other media outlets.

For what the article mentions, Wendi Deng is a Chinese-born woman who immigrated into the US. A married couple in the US sponsored her, she had an affair with the husband, then married him. Then she divorced the man when she obtained her green card. The story that CNN has on Wendi Deng should present huge red flags. But somehow a man of the savvy and means of Rupert Murdoch fails to properly vet this woman (either out of ignorance or stupidity), who will do incalculable damage to his own interests and the interest of this company?

This is coupled with the divorce of oil billionaire Harold Hamm (worth $10 billion). The article intimates that the couple simply drifted apart in 1998. While the details of why the marriage fell apart seem nebulous, it’s interesting that Mr. Hamm didn’t take his wife’s interests for a divorce as a warning and at least get a pre-nup or protect the assets of his company. Now his wife will stand to be one of the wealthiest women in the country, simply by virtue of the divorce settlement.

Men with the obvious intelligence and business savvy to build these businesses, coupled with the resources they have, couldn’t find “the right woman” to marry (obviously both men are blue-pill), and as a result are going to have their lives blown up. When Solomon can’t find an upright woman among a thousand, what does that say about the average man’s ability to find the right woman? When the potential is high for a detonation when you pull the pin on the grenade and you can’t tell whether the grenade will be a dud, are you going to take the chance?

From Superman to Clark Kent

With this new Superman movie in the theater, I’ve been reminded of something interesting and unique about Superman compared to the other superheroes. Peter Parker becomes Spiderman, Bruce Wayne becomes Batman, but Superman becomes Clark Kent.

Think about it. He’s the only superhero that puts aside his true identity, abilities and confidence. Indeed his whole self. Kal-El literally becomes Clark Kent, something he is not. The others put on their superpowers as they put on the suit, to become who they are. Superman is the exact opposite. He learns puts on someone that is totally not himself to get along and go along.


(Superman and Clark Kent in 35 seconds)

As he was cast off his home planet onto the Planet With The Yellow Sun, he had to grow up and learn to understand who he is. He grows to understand that he is The Man of Steel by finally traveling to the Arctic to learn of his true self. “Faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound”. He learns to aspire to great things by using these abilities as tools to accomplish these things. He has dreams of what he can do with those things and what he could possibly be. He then eventually learns of his full self and what he is meant to be. His dreams are out there to be fulfilled, along with legions of possible adventures ahead.

But then he meets a woman, and finds out that he is not that different from the actual humans and falls in love with her. This is despite the fact that she’s been particularly and purposefully troublesome on a lot of occasions, and learns what the real Superman is. In the attempt to ingratiate himself to her further, he uses a machine that has stored Krytonian sunlight to give up all of his abilities in order to be with this woman forever. Kal-El is stripped away and only Clark Kent remains. All the ability and adventures are gone. All those dreams gone. The freedom to fly into whatever adventure may come. The ability to deal with what may come. The ability to fight Zod, Ursa, and Non.

This is how marriage is sold and what single men are seeing. And they are seeing correctly, and what they are seeing is well known. “Honey can I go have a drink with the guys?” “Can I bring mine, uhmmmm, the guys are bringing theirs.” “No? You’ll keep them in your purse? Oh you want that too? Well…uhmmmm…okay honey. You’re the boss.”

It shouldn’t be any wonder why young men don’t want to get married.

Gentle and Quiet Femininity On Display

I know it’s going to sound blue pill side to be talking about this, but I have a bit of a field report. It’s not a field report like the gamers do, but something interesting at the store this weekend that illustrates an important concept in light of women: I encountered a feminine woman, a real woman. A woman I couldn’t help but smile and greet when I passed by. Now what I mean by that will come to light before the end of the post, but suffice it to say she was very memorable and stood out like a beacon compared to all the other women that I encountered that day. Not for her mere physical appearance (she wasn’t *ugly* – she obviously took care of her physical health), but for other things. Some lessons I took out of it to apply:

1. She obviously took care of herself.

You could look at her bodily appearance and see that she is fit and in shape. That part was obvious, but you could go on down the list of other things and see that she made effort in taking care of herself. Finding decent clothes to wear. Taking the effort to look good. She was the exact opposite of what Haley writes:

. . . lately I’ve been feeling really irritated at how frumpy so many women are. Frumpy clothes, frumpy hair – and then they wonder why no guys are paying attention to them, or they’re only getting attention from the guys they don’t want.

It was obvious that she did take effort regarding her appearance. And it showed.

2. She had long hair with a bit of personality.

But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. (1 Corinthians 11:15)

It’s no secret that there’s a correlation between long hair and feminine appearance. It doesn’t have to merely be long, but something that looks good and flatters the woman. As Haley writes:

If no one has told you that your hair looks good after a haircut, then you’ve been paying someone who doesn’t deserve your money. Find someone new to cut your hair, and keep going to someone new until you start getting compliments.

Her hair looked good and complimented her. If she doesn’t get compliments for her hair, people are failing her. Period.

3. She was dressed modestly and femininely, caring about her appearance.

In other words, she dressed herself respectfully and modestly and not as a slut. As Sunshinemary writes:

Sweatpants and pajama bottoms in public? Come on. And quit with the army pants and punked-out, black slut-wear. Put on a dress. Dresses and skirts look better than pants on most women; if you are a few pounds (or more) overweight, pants are the worst thing you can wear, as they draw attention to your thighs, hips, and tummy, areas which are gracefully covered by a dress or skirt. Wear hosiery unless it’s the middle of summer.

If I had to say anything about the other women at the store that most contrasted with this particular woman, it was this. You could say that the other women were trying to dress functionally for their shopping trips, but the woman I’m using as an example was shopping as well. It doesn’t have to be “to the nines”, but make an effort.

4. Her makeup was not garish.

If she had any makeup on, I sure didn’t notice. She didn’t look the opposite of put together, either, so I’m sure she’s taken some effort. Like Haley writes:

MOST MEN WILL NOT IDENTIFY THIS LOOK AS MADE-UP. MOST MEN THINK THIS IS A “NATURAL” LOOK AND SOME WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THE GIRL WAS WEARING MAKEUP.

As Haley’s post goes on to illustrate, what looks garish is what men register. Does a woman wear makeup at all? Probably, but if it’s not noticeable, men don’t care. I couldn’t really tell and didn’t care myself regarding this.

5. She didn’t have any visible body art or odd piercings.

As SunshineMary writes:

Please stop with the excessive tattooing and all facial piercing. This is ugly. You are not Kat Von D. And even she doesn’t look good like that, it’s just that she is naturally beautiful. Take the metal out of your face and replace it with a smile.

I always personally thought that those who would mark up their skin or fill it up with odd piercings had self-esteem issues with their appearance. It really is what it shows – your outer appearance is a good reflection of your inner mental state. Which leads to:

6. She possessed a quiet confidence that showed a gentle and quiet spirit accepting herself as a woman.

Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. (1 Peter 3:3-4)

This is perhaps the overriding thing if I had to pin down what quality it was that made her stand out. I could just tell that she had this quiet confidence that showed through her effort made into herself and the way she conducted herself. She didn’t show herself vain, frightened, angry, or uncomfortable. She was not rebelling against being a woman, but owned her identity as a woman, and cultivated it, and it showed. She may have poor qualities that would show if you got a look into her life or she opened her mouth, but she had the outward appearance of being a woman down.

As Suzanne Venker wrote, “Women aren’t women anymore.” This calls back to what I wrote above about it being the first time in a long time I’ve encountered a real feminine woman. It’s not that I haven’t met and interacted with real biological women. What I mean and what was meant by that statement in Venker’s article is that women aren’t embracing their God-given identities as women.

It’s sad to say, but a big reason that men are rejecting marriage with women in the church environment is that women don’t want to be the women that God intended them to be. Much of the blame for that is the blame of the modern church for ignoring the faults of women entirely and then slicing men to ribbons for their righteous faults, made-up sins, and simply because they are men. Address women in their faults and rebellion against God for making them women instead of busting on single men for not manning up and marrying the sluts, husbands for not submitting to their wives by making them feel loved and letting her feelings rule the marriage, and fathers for providing for their families instead of submitting to their children.

Links and Comments #12

Time for another round of sharing things I’ve been reading:


Unmasking Feminism commenter Lyn87 writes on the nature of game

The problem is not that enough men don’t know how to fake masculinity as well as a Roosh or a Heartiste, it’s that forty years of feminist zeitgeist and tens of millions of single mothers have eviscerated the appreciation of masculine virtues in the western world. In short, boys and young men don’t need to learn how to fake being masculine from nihilistic snake-oil salesmen, they need to learn to be masculine by masculine men – primarily their fathers.

The Perfect Churchian Boyfriend (Source)
The Perfect Churchian Boyfriend (Source)

Unmasking Feminism – Disclaimers for Christian Men Considering Marriage (it seems we can add David Platt and Matt Chandler to the list of pastors who want men to man-up and marry the sluts)

I say all this not to be a downer and to sway men from marriage, but so they can make an informed decision. Wives are not always sunshine and lollipops. The modern Christian message is to just man-up and marry any Christian looking woman and instantly your life will be transformed into this Garden of Eden haven. Don’t be fooled. There will be no heaven on earth.

The Return Of Kings – The Men’s Right Movement is No Place For Men

Deep down, MRAs believe not only that men are victims, but that men can only advocate for their rights insofar as they are victims. Victimhood grants legitimacy. Plight makes right. Look at the issues dearest to MRAs, and you’ll find that stories of male victimhood dominate their discussions.

Donal Graeme – Church Shopping and the Race To The Bottom

So what is the moral of the story? Simple: the ability of “Christians” to church shop creates a natural pressure amongst churches to race to the bottom, to the lowest common denominator, and adopt beliefs which don’t conflict with the worldly views of members or potential members.

Unmasking Feminism – Refined and Dirt Bags

Note how there is nothing YOU-ish about the men’s group. It’s NOT about YOU, but about what you do as a husband, father, and citizen. Your utility is prized above all else.

Should Men Be Shamed Into Marrying?

According to this pastor, Paul was a self-centered failure who needed to grow up, man up and get married so he could serve God instead of being an irresponsible, messy, immature loser. Paul needed a godly wife to civilize him, but he failed in life because he stayed single and immature. This view is probably the majority view in churches today, and it probably explains why men can’t be bothered with church.

Ten Commandments of MGTOW – enough said.

SunshineMary and the Dragon commenter Frank on The relative freedom a husband has.

I look at that and wonder if it’s even possible to maintain the autonomy of being a free man within the confines of a marriage. All the sex in the world can’t make up for liberty.

Women Changed The Rules, Not Men

It really is something when you hear women complaining about how hard they have it given they brought most of these troubles upon themselves.

Single Blokes Are Better Off Staying Single

Apparently his wife is a very sweet person; but she also owns his ass. It gets to the point where I mock him to his face about how his wife is in charge of his life, and he is so sackless that he simply laughs along, even though I can see quite clearly that the jokes sting whatever pride he has left.

The Easiest Way To Overcome A Depression

But, what is important to realize is that being depressed isn’t itself important. What is truly important is to understand your own emotional self, and to try and understand what it is that makes you depressed so you can avoid it.


Until next time. I leave you with Dan The Man Stage 1 (very good) stuff.

Letter To A Young Churchian Woman

(I have edited the post to remove all the links to the blog in question. See the comments for the reason.)

Dear Michelle,

I recently came across your blog, and read it with great interest. As a 20 year old single Christian man (with 19 years of experience), I’ve encountered numerous women on my walk and have learned lots of things from them about relationships and about life.

I’ve noticed many women want to wait and go after career and ministry, with the expectation that husband, marriage, and family would be waiting for them when they are done. The fact that you are giving thought to marriage as a 20 year old woman is a credit to you. If you are earnestly serious at finding a good, not perfect Christian man, you are ahead of many other women. They wait until they establish careers, party, or do a great deal of ministry before the thought of seeking a husband approaches their minds. They end up bitter and angry at the world and everyone in it because they’ve been patiently waiting until they have 19 years of experience at being 20.

I’ve noticed in a lot of women, as I’ve noticed in you, the tendency of women to wait and believe the perfect special man that God has set aside for them will appear. They have a huge list and expect God to meet them all. I know you follow The Personal Jesus from reading your other blog and reading this current one. Michelle, if you believe that the Lord serves women (and men) in their own desires instead of acts in His sovereign will by working all things together for good for those that are called of God, you will find a sea of emptiness and will be single at 40.

If God means you to marry, He will provide a suitable husband, not a perfect husband. Remember the story of the man in the flood? The man was sent three boats and a helicopter to be saved from drowning, yet refused all by saying he had faith in God that He would grant a miracle. The punchline goes that he had no reason to complain because God sent the three boats and a helicopter. The perfect in our feeble minds is the enemy of the sufficient, needful and perfect will of God. I might wish of my own will to live in a mansion, but should I not live in a house at all if the mansion is my desire? Should I not accept a simple house or apartment if it is needful and given to me by God’s grace? You may have this conception in your mind of the perfect mate, but God may have a totally different idea. Don’t reject “good enough” in the sight of God for the absolute perfect, which doesn’t exist, in the will of man. Grace requires that we settle for less than perfect, because God settled for us (men and women) while we were still enemies.

While your 33 point requirements list for a future husband is not as long as some, why do you think God should satisfy your every desire? We are wicked and wretched in His sight. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. It’s even by grace that we have the option of Christ Jesus. It’s by grace that we have anything by His hand, even a spouse if it is His will. We deserve only one thing by His hand. We should not think that God owes us anything.

On that note, I’ve noticed the tendency in a lot of “Christian” women in my 19 years experience as a 20 year old to not recognize the grace that God has given them before others, especially the men that would be their suitors. There are no perfect men. There are no perfect women. You are not perfect, Michelle, and neither am I. Maybe you don’t realize this well, as I didn’t. Life is hard. Imperfect people fall short. They hurt those around them that they love. They fail to do the things they should be doing and fail when they actually do what they should be doing. We are failures, but God gives us grace through His love for the faults, as He does through the blood of Christ Jesus when we come to Him in repentance for our faults before Him.

Michelle, please remember this when you remember the “mistakes” you have made by “settling for the wrong guys for the wrong reasons”. You might have failed God in some form of your standards, but you have failed God again in throwing aside His witness of grace and love in your life by being too exacting. This is only one of the messages you are sending men. Remember as I wrote above, I’ve encountered numerous women. In looking at your list along with this observation of your mistakes, the message is sent that no man is good enough to be your husband who walks this earth. The perfect man who does not get grace from you for his faults, must walk with a selfish, arrogant, evangelical entitlement princess who must be worshiped as the righteous goddess that she is, not to mention that her obvious faults must never be mentioned. Michelle, most guys will interpret what you wrote to mean “fornication”, in case you were not aware.

This may not be the young woman that you really are, Michelle, but this is how you are presenting yourself to men. You wonder if your Prince Charming might have requirements for you too. Not many women who are serious about marriage and relationships would accept a man with such a list in hand. You most certainly wouldn’t when push comes to shove. Most men wouldn’t accept your list either and would run the other way. This is not selfishness, this is “not settling for the wrong girl for the wrong reason”, namely because of her selfishness.

Have you ever given thought on what you are willing to offer a man who would be your husband? After all, God’s love is about selfless giving, not selfish getting. One of the things I’ve found in my life that is that my requirements list for women has grown very short over time. It’s okay to have one, but not such a long one that you won’t accept anything from the Lord’s hand. But I’ve found the list to shorten as I’ve learned more about my faults and the Lord’s grace that He has extended to me in my life.

In conclusion, I know I’m a callous evil man who just violated numbers 5, 7, 14, 16, 20, 21, and 31 on your list of poorly thought contradictory items with the intention of 1, 17, and peripherally 3. I know you are like other women I’ve encountered and thinking “how dare that insolent obstreperous pig for writing those things!” Be mindful of what the Scripture actually says about the nature of rebukes and what the wise do with them. I hope you listen and consider what has been written.

With prayer and Christian love,
Ballista74

The Politics of Hegelian Co-option

The last lesson from the AVFM and Kristina Hansen dust-up involves one that’s been discussed previously, the issue of the Hegelian Dialetic. That post applies to the dynamic of principles in the face of compromise or “building bridges” as the AVFM literature states. The fact that when a principle is compromised, it becomes worthless should not be missed. It should also, therefore, not be missed that an organization is co-opted (def 4 for those keeping score) by bridge-building to the point that what it advocates for becomes completely meaningless. We have seen this from A Voice For Men to the point that it is nothing more than a liberal feminist organization with no concern for the pro-male interests of men.

AVFM: Special Snowflake?
History teaches us this lesson again and again, to the point that people should learn. People should learn the mistakes of the past so they are not repeated. Yet we see the mistake repeated again: The inclusion of women and their interests in what should be a pro-male rights group. Men’s rights and misandry can never be compatible. This will have the effect of bringing down the group from the inside to devastating effect, as Kristina Hansen proved well:

The same can be stated about the left’s influence in the Men’s Movement. They are now trying to introduce their moronic mentality into a movement that they could not bring down, but they will try that now from the inside as they are taught to do. They wallow along with their confusing irrelevant PC mentality and inane warbling of the facts and intentionally confuse it to ensure that a different political viewpoint can be introduced along their own wayward, movement’s self-destroying mentality and agenda. It has already begun, as we can already read and see.

And the voice of history, Irlandes, writes:

Very few men who found MRA/FR groups bother to talk to those who came before. The argument goes like this: “I don’t want to talk to you. You accomplished nothing, so you are a loser. I can learn nothing from a loser like you.” Yes, at times, they use that sort of language. [like Paul Elam bitching about his detractors never doing anything]

Already at this stage, they are 100% guaranteed to fail.

And again on why these previous men’s groups were ineffective and ultimately failed:

In an MRA/FR group with real goals, female participation is the kiss of death. This is not intuitive, but it is reality. I am going to tell what happened in our FR group, but I contacted other groups to see how things went with them. Most of those in groups that accomplished NOTHING proudly said they had women helping, and they also sadly admitted they had a constant number of suicides among members. Our suicides dropped to zero once we ousted the women.

This is thoroughly evidenced in other venues as well. LGRobins points out this mistake with Christina Hoff Sommers’s new book and her efforts towards conservatives and feminism with this:

Wouldn’t it be something if I proposed my way to fight feminism is to create “red pill feminism”? You would all kick me right out of the manosphere and let the door hit me mighty hard. That is exactly what the conservative feminists are doing–they are creating more feminism to fight feminism. Like creating more debt to fix debt. But no conservative or conservative group has the courage to kick these conservative feminists into place. No accountability. They truly don’t know what they stand for. They just rebrand and repackage.

Sad news, Laura. Paul Elam and AVFM already beat you to it. They don’t know what they stand for, and don’t act on what they do say they stand for. But what they do end up standing up for is liberal feminism. All may not see it, but it will become fully evident.

Building Bridges With Feminists
Why is this? Simply put, the women’s demand to have a seat at the table and shape policy brought forth these failures. Inevitably when you “build bridges between men and women”, the women solely shape the policy because you have dependent men (white-knights and manginas) that remain. Even if the women willingly were to give men the primacy, the men would subvert it because they are addicted to their place in traditional feminism. They have no backbone and can’t tell a woman within their group or without to sit down and shut up when her anti-male interests come to light. As Irlandes writes, the reasons that female participation is the kiss of death for the interests of men are:

1. The women, mostly second wives or girl friends, who attended meetings, demanded half of the group’s work be to help women, in the name of equality.
2. They demanded we not allow men to whine; men are “supposed to act like men.” [in other words, men can’t be pro-male, and just need to stop their bitching]
3. The minute anyone attempted to enforce group bylaws, which generally meant telling an obstreperous woman to sit down and shut up, other men would do a great imitation of Don Quixote and rush to the attack against the vile brute who actually dared to seek justice for MEN. [in other words, women were not treated as equals by the men, but rather the men white-knighted. Pro-male interests died on the vine.]

Simply put, the reason why men’s rights group fail is that men are incapable of standing up to women. In other words, they have not gained their independence from women as fostered through the two systems of feminism and can not advocate for their own pro-male interests.

In terms of the history of AVFM, all these patterns can easily be observed. Just past his introduction of women and manginas into AVFM and the driving out of real MRAs, rechristening his movement’s followers WLBGTRAs, we see the strife starting. Just in the history of Kristina Hansen, we can see Paul Elam gushing all over her, and even white-knighting for her, and then firing her. All in a space of five months.

There are other ready examples to this end (namely involving GirlWritesWhat), but there is enough to prove that Paul Elam’s little group won’t be any different than the groups in the past. AVFM is a liberal group with liberal ideologies, which is well steeped in traditional feminism NOW. AVFM will show itself to not be the special snowflake with or without Paul Elam’s direct involvement (the general prediction is 2015 that Paul will get kicked out of his own movement). It’s been proven that the feminists couldn’t take them down from the outside, so they will try from the inside (Big Red said so). It will be a feminist plant or one of the women you got now. One troop loose inside the fort can do more damage than a thousand outside. Hope you got a tight rein on your site registration, Paul.

Assaults And Attempted Co-Option Of MGTOW
Notwithstanding, the attacks on MGTOW by Kristina Hansen, and the subsequent kissing up to them on AVFM (no Paul, you aren’t a MGTOW), the fact that women see MGTOW as a threat to their control of men has been proven time and again. As AVFM is and will be ineffectual for the pro-male interests of men since it still presupposes the traditional control of men by women, MGTOW proves a route to independence, where each man can declare independence from the dependence, control, and influence of women on his life. AVFM still operates with respect to men on a doctrine of dependence, which will produce nothing different for men than what they have now. It doesn’t matter if the liberal feminists, traditional feminists, PUAs, or AVFM is pulling the strings.

Women and male feminists quake in fear at the thought of men guiding their own lives in independence and living his own mission, thoughts, hopes, and fantasies. Women and male feminists quake in fear at men that won’t throw those things (and their own lives) away and shackle themselves as man-slaves to the nearest woman who will have him. Women and male feminists quake in fear at men who won’t engage themselves in anything but mutual partnerships born out of necessity. Women and male feminists quake in fear at men who demand something in return for their efforts. And above all, women and male feminists quake in fear at men who would hold women to account for their own actions and would demand that women take responsibility for their own actions equal to men (Jodi Arias will follow the pattern and never get the needle) and bear the consequences of them.

MGTOW is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever. The independent free man can never return to a life of shackles.

Conclusion
While I normally don’t have any interest in an organization or group that hates me for what I am as a man and therefore doesn’t represent my voice (and I think more and more men are going to agree with that as time goes on), this whole episode brought out a few good lessons worth blogging on. Is there a role for women in this whole thing? Sure, but not as equals at the table, since history has proven that women are absolutely incapable of being pro-male. The most useful thing would be to advocate for true responsibility in women (i.e. the Women’s Responsibility Movement), but the voices are silent in that regard at AVFM. This should be the most telling thing of all.

That’s all I have to say about the MRM. The usual and regular program of this blog (exposing misandry and other sin within the church) will resume next time.

The Descent Into Dependency

The next lesson in what has come out of the Kristina Hansen debacle at AVFM is the issue of dependency.

If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. (John 8:36)

The Victim Cult Is A Path To Slavery
The unfortunate thing about victimhood is that it puts a person into a state of fear, frustration and hopelessness. When a person gives into those things, they are enslaved into those things, and those things ultimately define you. This is what becoming a victim is all about.

Those invested in leading the cult of the victim are interested in creating control over others, in fact dominating others through shame, intimidation and other factors. The way of the victim creates a fear and hopelessness and then these people can ride in with all the answers. Victims simply are not experienced or capable enough to guide their own lives and make informed decisions, they say. This is the whole goal of liberalism, but the whole goal of a whole host of other factions. For example, the traditional feminists are also into the shame and dependency game, as evidenced by those out there who misrepresent Christianity by heaping hate and shame on men regarding marriage. The whole goal of The Master of Victims is to create a perceived inferiority on the part of people (by their “virtue” of being a victim) and then ride in and save the victims from their fear and hopelessness by prescribing that their way must be the only way and all others are wrong, hence proving themselves superior. This attitude is prevalent in Mizz Hansen’s second video:

We can see that in Kristina Hansen’s message as well:

I just think that peddling these ideas to young men, who have not even had enough experience to make an educated and informed decision to go MGTOW off the bat is cultish behavior, not to mention like the He-Man Woman Haters Club from the Little Rascals.

And from one of the Youtube comments, likely deleted by Mizz Hansen by now:

MrRavenNation
But, you can subscribe to an ideology and be an MRA/MRHA ONLY if WBB also supports that ideology dotchaknow.

And this post:

But our presence in the manosphere “strains” the recently formed alliances with liberal/socialist interlopers, so we have to go, or stop being MGTOWs, according to Kristina Hansen and her friends.

In other words, those that aren’t going Kristina Hansen path are in the wrong and are “straining alliances” and “cultist”. It’s not that Men Are Going Their Own Way, it’s that they aren’t going Kristina Hansen’s way. This is the path of liberalism, and the sneering didn’t only come from Kristina Hansen regarding A Voice For Men, but from Suzanne McCarley as well:

At AVfM, we seek to serve men’s most basic human rights, and we couldn’t care less which ideologues wave their banners over our work and try to claim it as their own. Such Ideologues will always exist, but men in peril can’t afford for us to wring our hands in fear of them.

The next comment gets the answer: “Kristina Hansen is an active doer in creating dependency, so (sneering) how dare we question her way!” Note that Suzanne never directly addressed anything that was written in the post or the comments. This is seen again in Kristina Hansen’s reaction (again a screenshot, I know why Cerberus Alpha does it, but kinda screwy to copy whole posts to quote people) to a very insightful Youtube comment on welfare and the cycle of dependency it creates. Putting people into a worse state by dependency and control is a much better thing in the mind of these socialist liberals than giving people the ability to stand on their own two feet.

The Declaration of Independence

Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. (Galatians 6:2-3)

But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. For every man shall bear his own burden. (Galatians 6:4-5)

The narrative of the victim cult must continue to be followed at all costs. The resistance from both factions against anyone who shows a degree of independence and conception of their own rights (especially self-determination) is great when it comes to men and women. Men can not allowed to be free and roam off of the plantation and it must be stopped at all costs!

As I wrote here, the state of independence for a man is the ability to think for himself and make up his own mind, form his conception of who he is and his mission through his own values, and then act freely on them outside the influence of others. In other words, he is free of the control of other men and other things.

As the Bible well illustrates, community is the rightful functioning of things (Galatians 6:2-3, as well as others), but one is to not function in dependency on that community (Galatians 6:4-5) but function in interdependency. Freedom takes work. Freedom is not taking short-cuts. Freedom is critically evaluating all that comes before you and making up your own mind and acting on it despite all else. Dependence is easy by contrast. Just sit back and follow and take. The easy path is human nature, which is likely why this admonition exists.

I would rather see men completely healed of the ravages of growing up with feminism by being helped with no victim shaming, to the point that they can get over it entirely and stand on their own two feet as fully actualized self-determining men, breaking the shackles of slavery that all would put on them (marxist and traditional feminism, including the victim cult). I would rather see men not dependent or addicted to anyone or anything (especially vagina), set out their own missions in life sans consideration of women, set out their own values sans servitude to women, and find joy, peace and contentment on their own terms. I would rather see men approach all of these things with critical thought on what is best for him and his interests and not for women, and stand up for himself in these against all comers, both men and women, and respond to both identically.

Christ and Christ alone is my personal answer and I’ll communicate that, but I won’t force the issue as so many others do with their interests. Christ bids people to come willingly, if He calls, the Holy Spirit will be the one to do that. I don’t follow because some woman was in church and I wanted to ingratiate myself to her. I don’t follow because some group or preacher pushed me into it. I have evaluated things and I willfully choose to follow that path.

In other words, I would rather see men become real leaders of their lives instead of having hooks in their noses to be led around by others (with or without the deception that he’s somehow leading when he’s in truth a sniveling and supplicating slave). I would rather see men be in control of themselves and not be controlled by other things and other people.

While God has me on His own path laid out for me, if I had to point out which group most closely identifies with this, it’s MGTOW. Coincidentally, this independence of the consideration of women in the lives of these men (read refusing to throw away their own hopes dreams and goals in order to service women) makes all women (and male feminists) quake in fear and where the hatred comes from for MGTOW from the likes of Ms. Hansen and feminists of all stripes. And Ms. Hansen’s reaction only proves that she (and AVFM) don’t really want to help men.

The Cult Of The Victim

The last links post was a little light because the big issue that fascinated me really blew up – the one of feminist MRA Kristina Hansen and A Voice For Men. There were so many interesting posts and good threads of thought illustrated by them. You can catch some previous material here and here.

There is an observed liberalist bent to both Ms. Hansen and A Voice For Men. Ms. Hansen has proven herself a subscriber to liberalism and feminism (through her opposition to the independent choices of men), but A Voice For Men is engaging in similar practices. The nature of these things will hopefully become evident as the discussion of the issues that are illustrated by this incident continue.

Bitterness and Anger Drive The Victim Frenzy
The whole dynamic of liberalism (and hence feminism) is based in Marxism. As pointed out before, this practice takes issues (real or manufactured), and then proscribes government as a solution, creating a dictatorial dependence. This takes placing people into a victim status of some kind and convincing them that it is a state of societal class nature. Feminism places women in the position of being good and men in the position of being bad, or man being the perpetrator and woman being the victim.

Mary Kassian describes the methods the Marxist feminists used to forge the victim cult that drives their movement. It was referred to as “speaking bitterness” or “consciousness raising” (1). As she writes (1):

They discovered the principle that collective bitterness and anger give way to collective political expression. The most effective way to instill in individual women a collective bitterness and unity of purpose was to expose women to other women in the context of small feminist discussion groups. By the process of group dynamics, small sparks of personal unhappiness could be fanned into an inferno of corporate discontent and political action. Large numbers of women would thereby reconceptualize their personal problems as having corporate and political origins.

Kassian points out that the process of reconceptualization and consciousness raising through the women’s personal experiences and feelings (2) was the seminal and vital building block of modern feminism. (1) In a process of re-education (engaging the rationalization hamster), the personal becomes the political through the use of a woman’s innate solipsistic nature. (4) This is the basis behind Team Woman group-think and the development of the Team Woman concept, where if one woman feels oppressed, then the whole group is being oppressed.

All the mens movements share a similar trajectory in some form or another. In these respects of operation, the MRM shares a similar method of operation to the feminists. They are using similar methods in their movement, as is the MRM. You could flip the genders on the Voice For Men website and it looks nothing different than the average feminist screed.

The Narrative Is Worth More Than The Real Victims
In maintaining the feminist narrative of the victim cult, it is essential to the health of any brand of feminism to discourage men who are real victims from speaking out, getting help, and being avenged for the evil done against them. This is done by the tactics of traditional feminism.

A man is to take all that comes his way from all sources of evil and injustice as “sacrifice”. If he does not engage in those things willingly or complains about them or the results, he’s not “a real man” and he needs to “man up”. He is told that he does not have rights, which is true in both the Marxist and traditionalist feminist ideologies. After all, what slave by birth has natural God-given rights to anything?

This is especially true if the offenses come from women, since he is supposed to “sacrificially love” all women. This means manning up and marrying the sluts, and manning up by being silent against all the injustices and abuse that exist in Marriage 2.0 and gleefully accepting them all. These attitudes are reflected in Ms. Hansen’s first video:

As Empathologism writes:

So, the experience these MGTOWs have is a society and its laws set against them, a preponderance of women they came into contact with set themselves against these men, some using the laws and social norms mentioned, they are now being told the solution is FOR THEM, get over it, get over it and join us the new human rights yadda blah liberal-in-sheeps-cloting organization and lets fix these things. How? well by typical micromanagement a la socialism/liberalism.

What is being offered men in society? Women haven’t victimized you, there’s nothing to see here. Or if you’re the MRM, look at how you have been victimized, men. Pretend nothing happened, join us, and we’ll give you all the answers you need. Nothing is being offered different than feminism is offering men now by the MRM.

Recognize the Real Victims
The liberals have succeeded well in creating a victim culture. 7 out of 10 of the individuals surveyed feel “oppressed”. The victim culture is so sacrosanct that participants will react violently when challenged. “Don’t blame the victim” is a common practice, reinforcing the victim cult. Men go against this part of the narrative, especially with women and false DV and rape accusations.

Since men can’t be victims by the narrative or people recognize the victim culture and overreact, those who are really hurt are being looked over. This is just another instance of the dehumanization and disposability of men. Men are really getting hurt and it’s not a matter of manning-up and “being a conqueror”, those that are hurt need help!

The story of the Samaritan can be easily fit to this new reality. The traditionalist, who sent the man down the path walks by the wounded half-dead man and says “too bad you need to man-up and be a conqueror”. The manospherian walks by and says “stop being a mangina and start being a real man”. There are men that need others to have compassion on them as the Samaritan. Too many men are being left bleeding on the side of the road because even the Red Pill folks are holding onto the narrative. This attitude makes people think male suicide is funny and allowed The Talk to get away with a ridiculous joke of an apology instead of being run off the air for good and then lynch-mobbed like what would happen if a man joked of a woman’s mutilation.

Shame the False Victims, Not All Victims
There’s a time and place to “stop being a victim and be a conqueror”, but that’s AFTER the wounds have been dealt with, not DURING. If it is something that really needs to be healed from, let it happen. If someone dwells in it when they are healed by their own anger and bitterness (or is just holding unrighteous anger and bitterness), the proper admonition is to get over it and move on, living your life with the lessons learned and not remain in anger and bitterness.

Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you. (Ephesians 4:31-32)

If it is someone who is lying to get attention, do harm to others by their false accusations, or just complaining and whining, they just need to GET OVER IT!

(1) The Feminist Gospel by Mary Kassian p 61 (2) ibid p 63 (3) ibid page 64 (4) ibid page 65