Archive for the ‘Marriage’ Category

ON CELIBACY

Next in the Moralist Series.

Mandated celibacy is a curse for many men who choose to follow this often unrealistic moralist doctrine.  Many moralists will proclaim that celibacy in next to holiness.  However living a celibate life is not natural to a man.  Did not God give Eve to Adam because it was not good for Adam to be alone?  The bible in other passages states it is rare for a man to choose a celibate lifestyle and to do so is akin to having an infirmity.  Could that be why marriage (with its attendant rules and punishments) was heavily promoted in the bible?  However that marriage model no longer exists for any man yet the moralist still promote celibacy for young men of faith as an absolute instead of a preferable standard.  I think it is good for men to reason out their own celibacy to make sure his reason for it are his own and not because of pressure from the moralists or any orginization.  Here is a good article discussing religion induced celibacy.

Should the church just stop discussing human sexuality and sex as it relates to men and women in and out marriage because of the harm and shame it inadvertently causes?  It is observable to see that the church is creating many problems for both men and women in the way it treats human sexuality.

There are two types of celibacy as it pertains to this discussion one is universally mandated (forced) celibacy as promoted by various church doctrines stating sex is only permitted in the state run marriage system, and the other is personal celibacy where a man chooses to remain celibate out of a personal conviction and not based on an outside factor such as certain moralistic teachings.

There are those men who believe that celibacy is preferred because sex is inherently sinful and is only made clean when a man and woman are married.  I believe this attitude is wrong and overall destructive to a man’s healthy sexuality.

Many Christian men feel that this choice has been made for them and are celibate because society and faith expected them to conform to a certain standard of behavior. Rather than choose celibacy as a personal call, they chose to conform to the traditional ethic that has been presented to them as the only orthodox option.

This is not really a personal choice for most of these men.  These men are essentially coerced into believing as such for if he slips up (backslides) while his loin’s burn, he is shamed back into line by his church peers and leadership demanding he repent for his sins.  His attitude causes a man to fell the attending and sometimes crushing guilt for his otherwise natural behaviors.  This guilt will stay with him subconsciously and in turn will negatively affect his sexuality in marriage.

The men who personally chooses to remain or become celibate because that makes him feel closer to God while he is single may choose when to stop being so because he falls in love with a woman and decides to commit to her (in marriage or not) and she commits to him, but eschew modern marriage. This is a personal choice made for his own personal edification and thus does not proselytize to others about his own personal decision.  This does not mean we will not share his views and experiences, but that is different than the judgmental attitude of the typical moralist.

The one way I see Christian men doing quite often is using the rationalization that they want a woman but are saving themselves for marriage when the truth is they could not get laid anyways, and of course there are no marriage prospects nor are they are dating.  This is simply lying to oneself.  For many of these men, had they had the chance and had they been able to meet women, especially secular ones, they would be having sex with them.  I suspect that for the typical professing Christian virgin man his virginity is a curse.  I am afraid that for these men, in his thirst will marry the first woman willing to spread her legs for him.  I don’t see this as moral but idiotic.

So for most men is the Christian form of celibacy a personal choice or a decision made under the weight of crushing and unrealistic expectations, guilt or shame?

Next we will talk about The Double Standard

Advertisements

The Moralists

August 27, 2014

Dalrock has a post that in the last few days has been gaining traction to becoming quite epic.  The original post discussed a young Christian woman who retained her virginity until marriage and then afterwards discovered she has some serious sexual dysfunctions.  It is obvious reading her story that she has some serious emotional issues as well.  From reading her story it is plain that she was taught that sex was shameful and dirty before she even reached puberty and understood what sex even was.  This is a common teaching that young people receive in almost every church to one degree or another.  These attitudes are not easily changed once a woman finally marries and sex becomes ok literally overnight.  The church’s repression of healthy attitudes about human sexuality and our natural sexual desires is just as ominous as the promotion of female promiscuity which the church also accepts and legitimizes.

It is not difficult to see that the origins of this young woman’s harmful attitudes about sex originated from with her church’s indoctrination and its foundational belief system.  Although she is a stout feminist, her attitudes about sex were likely fully ingrained into her belief system before she accepted the feminist ideology wholeheartedly.  It is important to point out that mixing modern church doctrine with feminist beliefs will almost always cause sexual dysfunction and unhealthy repression in not only women but men as well.

THE DISCUSSION

I submitted several questions and gave some hypothetical’s of issues pertaining to the main topic that I hoped would be discussed in a rational manner.  I also made a few statements to help guide things along.  These were legitimate concerns that many men do have when reevaluating their personal beliefs after taking the red pill.

What resulted was some men decided to mischaracterize what I said and then decided to engage in thinly guised character attacks.  I did not enter into these discussions really caring about what these other men and women think about me personally, nor do I currently care.  What is important is that the message gets through.  The level of debate, emotion, and rationalization from the church men this discussion caused tells me I struck some very raw nerves, which I will explain below.  That is good.  That was the point.  However many of the men who held themselves out as morally superior (moralists) avoided and ignored the most important points and questions I asked.  They engaged in a type of anti-intellectualism that for some of us well read individuals greatly annoys us.  However, not everyone did this, and not everyone held themselves out as a moralists.  These individuals greatly added value to the discussion.  This is pretty long but the problem is big and the solutions must be hashed out.

I will admit that some of my points were not as clear as they should have been.  My mind works extremely fast and as it happens at times, many of these ideas came to me in one fell swoop while I was writing my comments.  I believe this caused some confusion and if so I hope to clarify that here.  Also, because of the personal nature of some of the criticisms against what I wrote and the length of this essay I decided to post here on my blog and link back to Dalrock’s post instead of posting a simple comment.  I am going to break this up into a few different posts so bear with me.

One thing you may notice is that I no longer refer to myself as following any sect or religion.  The thing I find most disagreeable is hypocrisy.  For me to not be a hypocrite myself, for the many reasons below, I am no longer willing to identify as a Christian or promote the church in any way.  I feel by doing so could be harmful to good men by possibly encouraging him to join an organization where he is almost guaranteed to be hoodwinked by the feminine imperative.

ALPHA AND BETA

I am not going to get into a big what is Alpha and what is Beta discussion.  There are enough good resources out there if you want to know more.  However, what those two terms, and other like it such as Omega and Gamma, they are merely adjectives that encompass different sets of behavior patterns, attitudes and personality traits.  All three of these things can be changed in a man to a greater or lesser degree if necessary to achieve certain goals and objectives.  Many men often have a mix of these qualities.  The terms therefore are used loosely in my essays when I use these descriptive attributes.

THE QUESTIONS I PRESENTED

Is sex in a loving committed monogamous relationship just as moral as sex in the current Marriage 2.0 scheme where men are likely to lose?

Is sex between an unmarried man and women in a loving, committed, monogamous relationship inherently sinful?

Is it absurd and unrealistic to expect all unmarried Christian men to remain celibate when there is no other viable and rational option for sexual gratification other than entering into Marriage 2.0?

THE POINTS AND STATEMENTS I MADE

Church doctrine about human sexuality cases more problems and dysfunctions due to the inherent shame that surrounds most churches beliefs concerning sex in general.  This shame manifests itself in men and women even after they marry creating sexual issues in the marriage.

There is no consistency in church doctrine from one denomination to another concerning human sexuality, sex in marriage, marriage and divorce.  Most churches do not uniformly enforce its own edicts and local customs, even ones that are vigorously promoted within that church organization.  Many denominations refuse to teach the entire counsel of God.  The inconsistency on such issues such as divorce have ramification that could affect the salvation of the parties involved.  So how does a man know what teaching is truthful and which ones are in error causing him to sin?

Biblical marriage no longer exists because the state has usurped the bibles’ authority over family, marriage and sexual matter by legislative fiat.  Marriage 2.0 is a government promoted institution to ensure that the state has jurisdiction over a man, his assets and his children for later disbursements to his ex-wife should she choose to divorce him.  For biblical marriage to exist there needs to be social controls in order to discipline transgressors of biblical law.  Civil law would need to match biblical law.

Because biblical marriage no longer exists, a man may engage in sexual relations with a woman who he has a loving committed and monogamous relationship with without incurring the wrath of God or everlasting damnation.  God knows a man’s heart and will judge him according to that.  God will not judge a man for not following and unjust law or religious edict.  Godly suffering comes from God.  God would not place an impossible burden on a man and then call it a sinful should the man choose to opt out of trying to meet that impossible burden.

Additional points and questions relevant to the overall theme of this series and the previous points that were discussed will follow in subsequent essay in this series.

Next essay: Celibacy

images

It’s sad that so many men and women both have such a messed up view of what sex is, what it means and the importance of it in a monogamous relationship.  Take the case of Samantha Pugsley who through an unhealthy mix of her apparent hardcore Christian upbringing and her belief in radical feminism maintained her virginity until she married and now has a very unhealthy attitude about sex and especially sex in marriage.

Since pictures can tell a story by themselves this is her a few years ago and her now after her full indoctrination into feminism, colored short boy haircut included.  Her transformation validates that wedding cake is very fattening indeed.

She was able to convince an obviously very beta or omega boyfriend to remain celibate and wait for her throughout 6 years of dating.  What happens in these cases is that she turned her virginity into not only a big part of her identity but an idol.  The end result for these young women who have this attitude is that they often remain unmarried and become old spinsters who are still virgins, which is bad for men and women both.  The 463 point checklists these women create are also a big roadblock for them in their quest for the perfect feminist Christ like husband.  The whole virginity game that religious women and beta men play is harmful and can have lasting negative repercussions throughout their lives.  We see this game played out in celebrating virginity for virginity’s sake with purity balls, rings, and other such unbiblical nonsense.  These women’s virginity ends up being narcissistically all about them and not about the gift of their body to their future husband, as is apparent what happened in Pugsley’s case.

Although this seems far more common in virgin women than men, many of these people end of with unhealthy attitudes about their sexuality which creates sexual dysfunctions as seen in Pugsley’s article and throughout the comment section with women who adopted virgin game ended up disappointed because they failed to realize their unrealistic expectations about sex.  I follow a fellow blogger who also saved herself for her husband, but she was taught by her mother the proper attitude about virginity and about the importance of sex in her marriage and now her and her husband experience the wonders of sex as God truly meant for it to be.  A lot of poor teachings come from the parents of these young men and women.  The fathers of these girls essentially go super white knight and pedestalize their daughter which in turn just gives her unrealistic expectations because no man would live up to the fantasy that she created in her mind with her parents encouragement.  The boys on the other hand are also taught harmful attitudes.  One such thing is even remaining a virgin to begin with.  Unless a young man quickly courts and marries and has sex (which is biblical) he should be experiencing other women.  He should not become promiscuous per se, but a man does benefit from having experiences, sexual and otherwise, with other women.  A young man should never remain celibate just for the sake of waiting but only a short time in order to marry particular woman.  It’s also important to note for those men with moral hang-ups regarding sex, that nowhere in the bible does it instruct men to remain virgins prior to marriage.  I am of course challenged to raise up my 2 daughters with the proper attitude about sex so they will make their future husbands happy and have lifelong happy marriages.

The church is extremely schizophrenic when it comes to sex in general, and especially sex in marriage.  Deti’s comment stood out to me and nailed the point quite well:

From Pugsley’s article:

“When he did, I obliged. I wanted nothing more than to make him happy because I loved him so much and because I’d been taught it was my duty to fulfill his needs. But I hated sex.

“My feminist husband was horrified that I’d let him touch me when I didn’t want him to. He made me promise I’d never do anything I didn’t want to do ever again. We stopped having sex. He encouraged me to see a therapist and I did. It was the first step on a long journey to healing.

“When I have sex with my husband, I make sure it’s because I have a sexual need and not because I feel I’m required to fulfill his desires.

There is always a horribly distorted view of sex and a woman’s sexual role in marriage whenever these discussions are had. A wife is supposed to be sexually available to her husband at all times. She is supposed to give her husband sex when he wants it. Look at it this way: Would a wife put up with a husband who said “well, I’ll work when I feel like it. I’ll give you money to take care of the family when I feel like it, or I think it’s a good idea, or when I decide you need it”. Would a wife put up with that? Didn’t think so. So it is with sex and a husband’s view of it.** But women don’t want this. They don’t want to be totally sexually available to their husbands, for many reasons, chief among them are that most wives just do not desire their husbands sexually. This is a problem because most women are having sex with men who are more sexually desirable than they can get for marriage.

The other prime reason that women don’t want to be sexually available to their husbands is if they are, then they cede a lot of control in the marriage to the husband. A woman before marriage is able to control men by using sex and sexual access. Sex, sex appeal and sexual access are the greatest measures of a woman’s power, and if she gives them completely and totally to one man, she has given up most of her power. She doesn’t want to do this, of course, because that would require her to submit and trust, and what if he screws it up?

** NOTE TO liberals, feminists and other dipshits: I AM NOT SAYING THAT A WIFE IS CONSENTING TO RAPE. I am not saying a wife must have sex when sick or injured or recovering from childbirth. No loving husband would demand sex under those circumstances. I AM, however, saying that a lot of wives unreasonably withhold and limit sexual access. No wife is too busy that she can’t take 20 minutes out of her schedule to take care of her husband’s need. And if she is, then her priorities are screwed up. I am also saying that if a woman doesn’t consent to having sex with a particular man when HE wants to and NOT just when SHE wants to, then she should not marry that man and should not marry at all, because she has a distorted and improper view of marriage.

It is likely she was only a technical virgin and not one in fact.  She states in her bio she is bisexual and so one may deduce that not only do other women join her and her husband in bed, but she likely engaged in certain woman on woman activities prior to marriage.  That said, she was not a virgin and whatever waiting she forced upon her husband was not done in any biblical or moral sense, but as a way to satisfy her own warped view of controlling her own sexuality and sexual morality.  This is evident in her disgusting attitude of “my body my choice”.  All you have to do is read how she hates her husband so much she cannot stand the thought of being impregnated by him and goes ahead and terminates her pregnancy.  I just wonder what the story is behind her husband who waited 6 years in order to have sex with this average looking obviously mentally unstable woman who’s motivations are fueled by radical feminism.  Regardless of one’s religious convictions this man was nuts to remain celibate for 6 years while he waited for this woman.

Maddy 078

A fun and yet informative article on why sex everyday is very good indeed for marriages.  I would suspect this same attitude would benefit any LTR as well.  It comes on the heels of The Spreadsheet Couples troubles which would not have occurred if the woman followed Meg Conley’s advice. I have to agree with much of what this writer said and would think that her marriage, like others where the wife has a healthy attitude about sex, are likely very happy not only in their marriages but in life as well.  Of course I am a man and when my lovers approach sex like this it does make the relationship oh so much better.

The most important thing I noticed is that in the comment section you can see the truth about our society’s general attitude about sex and specifically sex in marriage.  Our society’s women by an overwhelming majority had devolved its notions of human sexuality.  I expected to read that no man should ever expect sex and how being a mother is somehow so degrading and unempowering.  Well what the fuck is modern marriage for then?  I was of course not disappointed.  No wonder our birth rates are so low and our divorce rates are so high.  Why would a man want to reproduce with such a creature that is the modern empowered woman?  Unfortunately the plugged men in often do.  The comment section essentially became a tirade by these feminists and the dutiful white knights supporting them.  It’s fun to look at these men’s profiles and see that they are fat bastards with peculiar hobbies.  I will briefly mention that if white knights would stop reproducing already or just take the red pill it would go a long way to finally killing off feminism.  However it is only when we put controls back on women’s hypergamy will we see improvements.  Unfortunately it will require the help of the AFC’s and white knights to accomplish this.

The feminists completely freaked out over one statement the author made that being a mother is “one of the ultimate expressions of womanhood”.  That statement is actually highly accurate and I would think that being a mother IS the ultimate expression of womanhood.  The feminists and the white knights, who outnumber the rational folks by a very uncomfortable margin as they always seem to do, go on and on about how it is not right and somehow immoral to see women as having children and God forbid, want to have sex and desire to please their husbands, as the normal beautiful thing it is. When you see a woman who has a positive and healthy attitude about sex, you see her man as also happy and wanting to give her happiness and pleasure.  It’s a self feeding circle of marital bliss.  Several of these women also criticized the author’s over simplification of men’s basic needs, where she said that if we are well fed and well fucked, men are usually pretty happy.  I think many of these types of comments were made by women who simply didn’t want to have sex with their husbands.  I don’t think I can disagree with that statement because nothing says I love you to a man like an awesome sammich before or after some really good sex.

What is ironic is that the women who could not have children for whatever reason really fly off the handle.  Many comments open discuss this.  These women have finally realized that that they cannot have it all as they face the wall and spinsterhood.  Some will snag their beta, but as the words used in the comments, many remain unmarried.  I sense a lot of guilt and regret in those comments, but solipsism and the feminine imperative keeps them from acknowledging their own responsibility for their very own failures.  Many of these commentators then make claims that defy nature and biology.  What these women fail to realize is that their attitudes are hurting their own happiness.  When there is relational equality, there is bad sex and unhappy partners.  You can almost see the bitter tears through the comments.  What the comments from the women boiled down to was that they had all sorts of insecurities about not being attracted to, and attractive to their husbands, being infertile, not being able to orgasm and of course the whole working mother thing and all of its related stresses.  The ideology that these women so believe in is the very same belief system that is the source of all of their unhappiness.

Another issue I want to take to task is that you have many women’s comments speak of how hard it is to work and be a mother and wife.  It is easy to see that all of the working mothers really hate on the SAHM.  Maybe if they reduced their expenditures and did things more traditionally like, oh the woman stays at home and raises the children and takes care of her husband.  It is really out there to think like that, I know.  Modern women will have nothing to do with this notion because raising a family and keeping your man happy is degrading and goes against the branding of the Strong and Independent Woman™.

It has been shown over and over again, and this article just proves it yet again, that the typical modern woman hates everything about masculine sexuality.  That is the medium of the message that you will read in every article from the one above to this one where essentially the same things are discussed.

poss-sella

Ironically I found the above picture from a magazine article from the 1960’s on the same feminist’s blog.  These women there also criticize the wisdom of the advice given and even go so far as to claim that those values never really existed.  It when I read women talk about these issues I again am reminded that Feminism really is a mental disorder.

The commentators overwhelmingly bash on the one red pill guy who just happens to agree with me, yet he and his ardent supporters of rational thinkers were greatly outnumbered.  As I stated yesterday to a white knight defending feminine imperative:

It could be he was trying to gain their approval in an effort to test the waters because he thinks spanking might be a good idea (unlikely), or he was entering into their frame as a white knight so that he could show these women how great and special he is because he not like that sadistic monkey over at The Reinvention of Man who like to spank his lovers asses red and then have wild sex with them (likely)

Or as Rollo puts it:

“What interested me most about this ‘discussion’ wasn’t just the intensity of the responses, but also how quickly and comfortably the Plugins were in their need to set the “troglodytes” straight. You see, in our disconnected lives it’s much more difficult to express our ideology without real-time social repercussions. We can get fired from a job, kicked out of our social circle, excommunicated from church or not be asked back to the lady’s bridge club when we venture a disenting perspective on a great many topics.”

Essentially the majority of the comments by women call childbearing unnatural, degrading, and unnecessary.  I wonder what how they would react if their mothers though of them as disgusting little parasites, as some of these women called little babies.  Apparently these women failed their biology and sex-ed classes.

One woman tried to enter some logic into the exchange and actually gets close to seeing it.

Cameron Mcmahan , I feel sorry for you…Advice for future…When you are a guy, you cannot make any comment which can in the farthest sense be considered anti-feminist…No matter how valid it is….

I think that the point Mr. Cameron Mcmahan is trying to make is that every species has the main target to survive. There have been many scientific researches about it and have been extrapolated to human species…Why are peacocks beautiful?? Why does lion have a mane?? Why in every species the male is given the extra plumes to impress females?? That is nature’s law…. If you believe that human species is different then that is your opinion and it is equally valid whether me or Mr. Cameron Mcmahan agree with it or not.

Fertile or Infertile, the pleasure of holding , developing and if possible creating a life and a baby IS unbeatable…I have never felt as invincible as on the day the doctor held those tiny feet and told me that you are a mom now…I have friends who have adopted children and they felt the same way when they held their baby for the first time…

I don’t believe that both genders should be treated equal … because they are not “comparable”… I do not believe that creating a good marriage and having children is anyway demeaning…I, for one, am proud to have that role… And yeah, I have been a working woman for a pretty long time and DID give it up entirely by choice and to all the feminists, there is nothing bad about it…

If you do not wish to have children or cannot have children, its ok…you dont have to defend it…you do not need to prove anything to anyone…The fact that you are defending it just goes to show that you have some doubts about your decisions…

So this begs two questions. Is childbearing one of the ultimate expressions of womanhood, or is it THE ultimate expression?  And, would marriages be better if the wife was more giving in sex as an expression of her commitment, love and respect for her husband?

Christianity has become extremely feminized over the last 20 years or so and I would say that the women a man would meet in church are worse marriage material than the women he would normally meet in the secular world.  Churched women have an unrealistically high sense of entitlement that would be difficult for any man to satisfy, Christian or not.   And of course as a man you will receive a constant barrage of “Man Up” and “men bad- women good” messages, with some twisted scriptures thrown in for an illusion of credibility.  As for me, I have an evangelical protestant background from when I started attending church on my own in my early 20’s but I was not brought up in any church.   The following are mostly from my own personal observations.  I no longer attend Church nor will I ever again.

You have 3 types of women in church:

  1. The actual virgins are looking for the perfect husband and are often so deluded with lists so long that only Christ himself would qualify as good enough to pop her holy cherry. Many of the young women in this group seem to turn their virginity into a type of idolatry.  It seems that God turns out to be the biggest cock block for those men with enough guts to approach these girls.  I say guts because with these young women it will be like traversing a battlefield with the prize of her pure untouched punanni on the other side.  You will just have to hope and pray (and trust her word, lol) that she wasn’t giving up anal sex and blowjobs in an effort to save her pussy for marriage so she could “technically” still be a virgin.  Of course the average churched young man would need to have every qualification on her 463 bullet point list and need to put a ring on her finger before you can get into her panties.  Just remember that these same women have been promised in all of her church groups, in the sermons she heard and from the elders women that their virginity is so valuable and the sex will be so good in marriage that these women on that faithful night will expect nothing less than the planets aligning, the seas parting and little birds singing as they sit on the windowsill.  Unfortunately it is unlikely that she will even reach orgasm that first night and if her new husband is also a virgin they will have quite a bit of a learning curve to deal with.  The worse things these women could do is marry a man who is a virgin himself.  I think it would be best if these young women married men who were considerably older and more experienced than them as was the norm for most of human civilization.  Only an older experienced man has the hand to deal with these entitlement princesses.  Her virginity would only be partial payment for the work he would have to do with her.  However no modern church would ever condone such a thing.  Some of these women will never learn to settle for a real man when compared to the imaginary prince she envisions, and will end up the 30 year old spinster virgin who has lost whatever looks she had and her fertility window.  Many of these women have an unrealistic vision in their heads of what they think they deserve because God said that they are the princess’s to the His Kingdom.  It’s sad to think of all of the good men they ended up disregarding out of hand because of these expectations.  This woman will still need to be gamed hard by her husband because her entitlement monkey will be strong in her.

 

  1. Now we have the born again sluts who rode the carousel hard and are so screwed up biologically, mentally and emotionally that any man who dates (or God forbid, marry) them is in for a world of hurt, torment and self doubt. (Yes, I have seen this many times). I will say this in case you didn’t figure it out from the previous sentence; NO RINGS FOR SLUTS! Period.  The singles ministries are full of them.  They can fake being good girls but an observant man can pick out these women.  You can always go to the Sunday morning nightclub and score with these women where they outnumber the men significantly, but do not marry them.  These women have low impulse control regardless of their new found faith and only the strongest of alpha’s will be able to hold her down (at least temporarily) in what would likely only end up only being a semi monogamous relationship.  For any guy with Game trying to score with these women they are perfect pickings.  Just don’t marry them.  I have even seen men in church have a harem of these types of women in the same church, although this is very rare because most churches will kick such a guy out quickly.  Another thing with these women is that the church will never hold them accountable.

 

  1. Then you have the old housewives who although may stay at home, home school and all of that, you can tell just by meeting them briefly that they are overbearing harpies and all of their husbands are incurable beta chumps who behind the masks of the “yes dears” are utterly miserable. These women will support women’s preferred type of sexual promiscuity, serial monogamy.  They will make sure that men are adequately shamed for such infraction such as dating much younger women and those who do not tow the modern trad-con line.   It is these women that either directly work with church leaders to drive out good alpha Christian men or create the environment where good alpha men will not come to church.  These women will often try to make sure certain rules are followed in order to give other Christian women moral cover for their bad decisions and lack of discretion.  These same women are the ones raising and teaching these younger women in the church how to get what they think they are entitled too.  It is bad that they refuse to follow and heed God’s words in the matter.

 

The modern church will also ruin a good woman.  Yes, those women do exist in very small numbers.  In all good conscience I would never take my daughters or any woman I am in a relationship with to any modern church.  Now good churches do exist, but they are few and far between.  The good ones won’t have rock bands or child ministries or any of that “new” stuff.  The best type of worship services are held in someone’s living room.  But because the pastors of these churches are usually still beta white knights and total mangina’s I am still given pause.  Either way these good women will be negatively influenced by their Christian sisters and that is never a good thing.  In reality Christian women are not looking for a Christian man to marry so they can be a good wife to him and mother to his children, no, they are looking for a man to worship them like she worships herself.

 

See Also:

Reframing Christian marriage

Reframing Christian marriage part 2: rebelling wives aren’t to blame for their own rebellion.

Reframing Christian marriage part 3: husbands as helpmeets.

Reframing Christian marriage part 4: judging the performance.

Reframing Christian marriage part 5: sex as a weapon.

The Typical Christian Woman’s List

How many times have we seen our friends move in with a woman or have their girlfriends move in with them and then later the relationship always fails and your friend is worse off than if he had not lived with his girlfriend?  I see this all of the time.

But it gets worse for men who live with their girlfriends.  Now we have some interesting data that living with a woman is worse for your health than living alone.

Married men were more likely than cohabiting men and other not-married men to have had a health care visit in the past 12 months.

Figure 1. Percentage of men aged 18–64 with at least one health care visit in past 12 months, by marital status: United States, 2011–2012

db154_fig1

Regardless of age, married men were more likely than cohabiting men and other not-married men to have had a health care visit in the past 12 months.

Men aged 45–64 (79.6%) were more likely than men aged 18–44 (64.1%) to have had a health care visit in the past 12 months. However, the association of marriage and cohabitation with men’s use of health care was generally consistent regardless of age. Among both age groups, men who were married were more likely than cohabiting men and other not-married men to have had a health care visit within the past year. Cohabiting men were less likely than other not-married men to have had a health care visit within the past year (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Percentage of men aged 18–64 who had at least one health care visit in past 12 months, by age and marital status: United States, 2011–2012

db154_fig2

Married men were more likely than cohabiting men and other not-married men to have received recommended clinical preventive services in the past 12 months.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that, on a regular basis, all adults have their blood pressure checked, men aged 35 and over have their blood cholesterol checked, and adults with hypertension be screened for type 2 diabetes (3). Marriage and cohabitation were both related to men’s receipt of these clinical preventive services. Among men for whom the service was recommended, receipt of each service was more likely for those who were married than for those who were cohabitating or not married. Cholesterol and diabetes screenings were less likely for cohabiting men than for other not-married men (Figure 4).

db154_fig4

Summary

Married men were more likely than not-married men to have had a health care visit within the past 12 months. This association was observed for both younger and older men, but only among men with health insurance. When men have the means to access health care, spouses may play a role in their use of health care by directly encouraging men to seek preventive care and by indirectly evoking in men a sense of economic and social obligation to the family (1,2).

The results suggest that cohabiting partners do not play a similar health-promoting role. Compared with both married men and other not-married men, cohabiting men were less likely to have had a health care visit. They were also less likely to have had selected clinical preventive services in the past 12 months, including blood pressure checks and screenings for elevated cholesterol and diabetes. In fact, cohabiting men are a group particularly at risk of not receiving clinical preventive services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Only about one-half of men in this group for whom cholesterol and diabetes screenings are recommended had received these screenings in the past 12 months.

Summary and charts from the CDC:

So what does all of this tell us?  Married men are usually encouraged by their wives to take better care of themselves and go to the doctor for preventative health care services.  Single men living alone are less likely to go to the doctors but still they seek out preventative medicine in substantial numbers.  For men who cohabitate with a woman they are the least likely to go to the doctors for preventative medicine and they take care of themselves the least.  It seems that they are less healthy overall than both married and single men living alone.

Looking at this as a social dynamic, I speculate that the women these men live with care much less about them than a wife would.  Living with a woman is so much different than living with your wife (who you did not live with previous to marriage) for a variety of reason.  There is a subconscious dynamic that although it initially may be hard to see, it is there.  Not only will you be less healthy but you will be less happy overall.  There is never a good reason to live with a girlfriend.  Just ask yourself what are the benefits that you cannot get living alone, with male roommates, or even just marrying her?  Will she appreciate you more?  Will you have more and better sex?  Will your girlfriend whom you agreed to live with love you more?

I think the worst thing a man could do is live with a woman and then marry her.  The dynamics involved will almost certainly assure that not only will the marriage ultimately fail but the marriages that do in fact succeed (in relative terms) the man will be more miserable overall.  In these situations such as this the man becomes preconditioned by the faulty premise of the previous cohabitation dynamic.  Thus the merging of the different dynamics from cohabitation to then marriage is such that most men are powerless to navigate the minefield of a woman’s hypergamy and solipsism.  Maybe she really loves you and wants to always be around you.  That is fine, but remember, the anxiety she may feel when you two are not together is the same emotion that helps keeps her attracted to you.  When you agreeing to live with her you take away that anxiety and you lose your power and most importantly room to maneuver and you might die sooner.

Iron Rule of Tomassi #4
NEVER under any circumstance live with a woman you aren’t married to or are not planning to marry in within 6 months.

Sexless Marriage Series #2

The Spreadsheet Couple who received so much notoriety as of late as shown some very disturbing trends in how a large portion of American men and women think about sex, especially sex in marriage.

One issue as Dalrock recently brought up is the vagina’s power that women often then misuse with most men.  I agree that the nets reactions was based on the sudden loss of the wife’s V-power and all women’s sudden worry that their men would wake up and realize how tenuous their own power plays really were.  Go read Dalrock’s article and come back.

I will however disagree with Dalrock’s observations that women were only half hearted in their support of the wife.  The articles were essentially all the same, essentially telling us that this guy creates a spreadsheet because his wife didn’t want to have sex and that although she should have used better excuses, no man, and especially this lame ass, should ever expect sex from his wife or any women.  What I read was pretty much all female and most male writers supported the wife directly.

Another issue is the very disturbing trend that I have seen reading the comments on the various articles.   This trend is one of male entitlement to sex, specifically as it relates to the sexual dynamics within a marriage.  Feminist have been telling women that their body is theirs to do with as they please regardless of consequences or context.  At first this was directed towards abortion and the feminist’s belief that only women have a right to decide whether to kill their babies or not.  Of course the fathers feeling in the matter are irrelevant.  However, this same attitude spilled over into the sexual arena.  Now we read stories such as this where a wife consistently denies sex to her husband and he is then compelled to document her refusals and reasons in a spreadsheet.  Instead of working on her marriage WITH her husband, she runs off and posts the spreadsheet and her brief story in the net hoping to garner the support of her sisters.  We then see women and their male supporters come out of the woodwork in droves supporting this woman using the same logic that a woman has an absolute right and even an obligation to refuse sex to her husband anytime she does not feel like it.  The modern woman and mangina really do believe that a woman should NEVER put out if she did not immediate desire sex and that sex should ONLY occur if she wants it.  Of course a lot of blame was laid at the husband’s feet because he approached his wife everyday for sex.  Apparently men are not supposed to do that either.

Now we all know, or should know, that you don’t “ask” a woman for sex, you initiate sex with her.  Oh, I can hear those feminists yelling rape already. Speaking of which, the feminists and manginas often state that anytime any man, husbands included, cajoles, pesters or negotiates for sex it is rape when the woman finally gives it up so her man will shut up about it.  Although I find having to pester any woman for sex unacceptable and I would never do that, I do not think such a thing is rape.  I need to write about what rape is and what it is not.  I know that essay will piss a lot of people off.

So what are a woman’s rights and obligations in regards to her husbands or boyfriends sexual desires and needs?  As I stated before, MEN NEED SEX.  I am not talking about duty sex which is lame and is usually less satisfying than looking at porn and jerking off, I am talking about good mutually enthusiastic and satisfying sex.  Without regular quality sex men will normally drift away from his spouse emotionally.  In time he may want nothing to do with her.  This happened to me. My now ex wife always maintained the belief that men are not owed sex and we ended up drifting far apart, so much so that I had zero desire to even try to reconcile with her after she left.  Needless to say our sex life was lame, I looked at porn, she pulled a Jenny Erickson and left.  On the other hand an ex girlfriend of mine not only told me she believed her job was to keep me utterly satisfied, our sex life was such that I had no thoughts of looking at porn and we even adopted the practice that every orgasm we each had would be with the other person.  No more going solo.  She didn’t care if I looked at porn, but we both wanted to share ourselves with each other all of the time.  Simply put, she derived satisfaction by tending to my needs and I derived satisfaction tending to her.  Yes there were times I didn’t want to have sex but because I cared for her I did it willingly and enthusiastically and I’m sure there were times she didn’t want to have sex also.  Ok maybe not, but she still would have had sex anyways.  Another thing to mention is that by cuming inside her pretty much every time I think the bond between us was greatly increased.  Also, regular sex keeps our man parts in good working order and we do feel discomfort and even pain if we have to go too long.  Either way men’s bodies are designed to have sex and ejaculate very regularly.

As Dalrock puts it:

A wife who almost never wants to have sex with her husband is a terrible wife.  As with a slut, only a foolish man would (knowingly) fall in love with a frigid woman.  However, unlike the slut she isn’t even desirable.  A frigid wife is powerless, undesirable, and (romantically) unlovable.  This recognition is what so horrified women around the world when the spreadsheet went viral.

We know that some women will refuse sex often, even when she wants it in order to leverage the power of her pussy.  However this is not the way God or nature intended things to work.  Reading Dalrock’s statement above we see that a frigid wife is a bad wife, a woman not even deserving of our love.  He is right.  Even the ones who “claim” they do cook, clean, etc. unless they are tending to her husband’s sexual needs she is still a bad wife.  You can hire out most of a wife’s other duties, but sex should not be one of them.  Sex is the only bio-chemical bonding a couple will experience.  I have yet to meet or hear about a sexless couple that is happy with two normal adults.  Although no woman seems to understand her own body as well as she should, that is fine because the amateur gynecologist is here.  Reading the comments from Scarymommy’s article it is easy to deduce that sex reinforces the bond between a loving monogamous couple such as a husband and wife.  You will read many of the wives report that they feel so much closer to their husbands with the more sex they have with them.  Without getting into the science, let me say that the science backs this up.  I just made a Walsism, oops.  Anyways, I will save the scientific details for another essay I am working on because it’s that important and it’s interesting.

A wife owes her husband sex.  Even in other committed and monogamous relationship sex is owed to the other partner.  We explored the health benefits and the benefits to the relationship.  Let’s now look at another issue the feminist will certainly scream about.  Us men we work hard for ourselves and our families.  Oftentimes we sacrifice our happiness by not doing things we would rather do or work a job we would enjoy more but the pay would be much less.  Also when we get married we EXPECT that there will be regular and enthusiastic sex with our wives as much as reasonably possible.  For the promise of our commitment, which men honor way more than the modern women does, we want sex, which is also part of the promise and commitment on the part of the woman.  What we do not want is to be the second man eating off of the same plate, which all too often happens.  Married women and women in committed monogamous relations have a responsibility to have a genuine desire, and to actually have sex with their men.  She owes it to him for his commitment to her and in exchange for his work.  If she no longer is sexually attracted to him then she should end the marriage and refuse to take any of his assets when she leaves.  In other words a woman might have to fake it, yes I know, but if she truly loves him her negotiated desire will likely change to the genuine desire which is so important in any couples relationship.  When a woman marries or otherwise commits to a man she loses her right to continually say no.  If she has a medical condition that makes sex difficult she needs to address it immediately.

One thing about control and feminism as it pertains to this instant issue.  Feminism and by extension pretty much all American women desire to control men’s sexuality.  They will use their frigidity, or refusals to have sex, their anti-porn stance, and of course the all too common tactic of using sex as currency.  All of this boils down to not just women attempting to control men’s sexuality but women controlling the whole man.  If you have a woman like this it’s simply better to leave.  It will suck at first but in the end a man will be better off.  I have noticed that many frigid women and women who use sex as power have deep emotional issues and unresolved baggage in their lives.  All you have to do is talk to a feminist pansexual woman for only a few moments to smell the psychosis.  One study pegged over 20% of American women fall into this category.  Unfortunately these same women can behave themselves long enough to snare an unwitting man into a relationship with them.  As I said before the man should just leave her.  If for whatever personal or financial reasons a man decides to stay, he will have to game the shit out of her hard and be at the peak of his own emotional strength.

Sexless Marriage Series #1

I was first going to write this essay about the Spreadsheet couple that has recently gone viral over the internet and the sphere here and here just to mention a couple of good articles, but I wanted to address this one thing first.  Men who look at porn.  Much has been written about this subject and I think most of it is wrong.  I am not going to take a moral stance against it because doing so will not only dilute the topic because I believe the common moral stance against itself immoral.

Men NEED sex.  Be it from their wives, a girlfriend, a mistress, hooker, Fuck Buddy, or good old jerking off it does not matter, we need to have that release often and when it comes to actual sex it needs to be good.  If we are in a loving monogamous relationship, regular quality sex causes us men to love and bond to our women more.  Likewise they bond to us more.  It’s funny how biology works.

However, the attitude of the modern American woman is that we, as men, are not entitled to sex and therefore should never expect it, even in the confines of a monogamous relationship or even marriage. Yet, these same women will state that they are entitled to an earth-shaking orgasm every time they bless the man with access to their golden magic super awesome vaginas.  Of course any man who might want sex from a woman, or dare I say expect it as part of their relationship is a creep.  This even applies to the husbands of frigid wives.  These women will of course get quite angry if a man ever rejects her sexual advances and will even post his rejection of her online with her hamsterlation on why she is so wonderful and how he was an asshole.  The other side of this coin is that men do not owe women commitment, fidelity or our resources.  If we are married and have scrotial fortitude we may very well leave them or fool around on these women.  Sorry babe, but that’s the price you will pay for your rejection of us.  Also it’s worth mentioning that a woman who only offers duty sex or who is otherwise frigid or unenthusiastic is quite unattractive, at least to me.

For the hapless beta or man who is otherwise chained to an unhappy marriage because of his religious beliefs there is porn.  Yea porn!  It’s maybe not the best thing for reasons I won’t get into right now but for many men it’s a valid alternative to getting a mistress, going to hookers or divorcing his wife.  Just remember that for most of you moral shackled men, your wife has done things too.

If a woman wants to keep her man around she needs to give it up enthusiastically and often, she needs to stay fit and be an overall pleasant person to be around.  The only happy relationships I have seen all had an exciting and full sex life in common.  Most western women simply refuse to be exciting in bed with their men.  They use sex as a commodity to be traded for men’s resources, favors and oftentimes commitment.  I don’t think many women even do this conscientiously but as a result of their upbringing in our feminist and female entitlement driven society and the unshackling of women’s behaviors due to feminism.  Then they take this destructive attitude about sex into their marriages essentially putting their own pussy on a pedestal all the while forgetting that sex is one of the main (and most important) components to bonding with your spouse.

I have to mention that when many of these women were young, and considering the modern view regarding female promiscuity, these women, now wives, likely had sex with quite a number of partners prior to marriage which would have lessened their overall value as potential mates and have increased the chances any marriage they entered into would ultimately fail.  Some became alpha widows and in all likely hood irreparably damaged their ability to pair bond to any man they might meet in the future.  When these women finally did catch their beta husband after a solid ride on the carousel, they will all too often deny him the wonders of her past sexual experiences and only give her now husband infrequent and vanilla sex.

One issue that came up several months ago was with Matt Walsh’s article telling married men that when they look at porn they are committing adultery thus lending moral justification to millions of women to justify divorcing their husbands.  I was heavily involved in the comment section which seems to have been erased for some reason.  It was good that I made notes at the time.   There were over 3000 comments on that article back in February.  Now there are only a little over 300.

In the comment section of that article there was a vigorous back and forth between commentators stating essentially the following three positions:

  1. Almost 95% of the female commentators stated, and many times with much vitriol, that a married man looking at porn is in fact equal to and in some cases worse than the act of committing adultery with another woman. Most of these women were self professing Christians. Several women stated that when they caught their husbands looking at porn they were mortified and so disgusted they never wanted to haves sex with their husbands again. In many cases They also stated that previously they were more than willing to have sex with their husbands but were rejected because their husbands would rather look at porn than have sex with them. I would say that a majority of these same women ended up divorcing their husbands for this reason alone, or for the ones who have not done so yet are seriously considering divorce. Most of these women plainly state that no man, including their husbands, are not entitled to, nor shall he expect sex on a regular basis with his wife.  Of course these same women get upset when their husbands would rather look at porn then have duty sex with them. These women then lavishly praised Walsh on his courage in writing the article condemning all men who dare to look at porn as adulterers, perverts and rapist in waiting.  This group of women and their supporting men always blames the man.  They say things like any man who “needs” sex lacks impulse control. They shame anyone who has a different view than theirs, oftentimes telling these individuals that they are sorry for their partners because the commenter in support of porn is such a wicked vile individual.  Most will shame any man or woman who even mentioned that looking at porn may be caused by a spouse not getting sex from their wives.  Most of the vitriol is directed to male commenter’s and the female pro porn commenter’s are responded to with a little les hate.  The people in this group never mention women looking at porn, divorce porn, or women and their romance novels.  The men in this group seem to me like they are soft and catering to their wives opinions.

 

  1. Another camp defended anyone looking at porn. This group postulated that in many cases porn use seems to be the symptom of them not getting enough actual and “quality” sex in their marriages and from their wives. This camp stated that INSTEAD of committing REAL adultery by having sexual relations outside of the marriage covenant they will look at porn and take care of their own needs instead.  These men along with a few women who supported these men’s actions, would rather have good fun and enthusiastic sex with their wives but either their wives are lame in bed (read duty sex) or their wives are just not interested in sex with them.  As stated above, this group was shouted down and shamed by the anti-porn people for their opinions.

 

  1. The third and smallest group consists of both men and women who both look at porn with and without their spouses or partners, but each allowing the other to look at it and even encouraging the other spouse to explore their own desires and fantasies online and later discussing what each other likes and even using porn as foreplay. From what I gleaned from the limited information in the comments, these men and women seem to enjoy the most stable and yet exciting marriages.  They also seem the happiest with their spouses. One thing I did notice is that in these marriages and relationships neither person overtly identified as being a Christian.

 

It should be obvious by now that feminist and trad-cons share many harmful ideologies in regards to male sexuality, male shaming, porn and divorce.

It seems to me that women who stridently identify as being Christian are the ones who seem to not only feel they are entitled to withhold and deny quality and regular sex from their husbands but that they will almost certainly be willing to divorce their husbands for the singular reason of him looking at porn, thereby stealing his money, resources and children from him using the Church™ and its femcentric teachings along with articles like those from Matt Walsh and Jenny Erickson as a justification for their decisions.

As for the article I think its pure rubbish.  All it was is pandering to women, especially Christian wives, giving them moral cover for frivorcing their husbands.  It was pointed out by a small minority of aware men that this article and others like it highlight that not only do men need regular and enthusiastic sex with their wives, these men when deprived will take the path of less damage and look at dirty pictures and videos instead of carrying out an actual affair with another woman, which in reality if done, may have a far greater negative consequences for the marriage than a man simply looking at porn, or would it?

Jenny Erickson left her husband over his alleged porn use.  It seems that in her case and with the many men who have to resort to porn and masturbation to relive themselves in their sexless marriages, porn is just a symptom to the far greater problem of having a wife who continually denies sex to her husband and when he finally does get it on his birthday and anniversary, if that, it is worse than lame.  In these marriages porn is more fun than having to throw a fuck into and likely overweight, definitely overbearing unpleasant woman.

There are many real world consequences for women’s prior and current bad behaviors.  Sex and female promiscuity prior to marriage and women’s entitlement attitudes are two issues that have negatively affected more marriages than any other issue, including men looking at porn.

I found this post on Alpha Game to be a very entertaining and illuminating back and forth between an older Christian man denouncing Game and Deti, Vox and Yohami to name but a few.  The OP was originally about a socially inept liberal manboob’s rant calling Roissy an asshole for his writing about Game, women’s natural hypergamy, and essentially the poor state of things in our morally corrupt society that has gotten rid of all restrictions on bad female behavior while shaming men who exhibit positive masculine traits.   Unfortunately this is a common stance held by the majority of men who throughout their lives, have utterly failed with women and the White Knights who proclaim themselves followers of Christ.  (There are also many secular white knight manboobs.)  Both groups, while sometime differing in their ideology, cause great harm by encouraging women to not only behave badly but they give an air of acceptance to women’s poor behaviors and downplay the consequences of those behaviors.  They are also harmful in respect to misleading men by denying the true nature of women (they think they are all special snowflakes) and denying all levels of Game.

It’s interesting to note a few things found not in the article per se, but in the comment section.  The first issue of import is that all women are in fact sexual beings.  I even read something recently that stated that women are in fact more sexual than men.  I can see some truth in that.  For the sake of staying on topic we can put that aside for now. The important issue is that all men and women, in and out of the Church are members of the SMP.  Whether they are married or not is also irrelevant because even in marriage couple have sex, or at least they should be doing so, exclusively with each other of course.

As Deti stated here, even women in the Church are looking for sex with attractive men.  In fact some of these women may even have husbands.  You can go into any medium or large sized church and see that the women are dressed not for church but for the Sunday Morning Nightclub.  I think the short skirts and panty shots should be proof enough.  However too many men will try so hard to tell us aware men that these women are all good girls when in fact many of them are reformed (born again) sluts.

I encourage you to read the article and the comments for a pretty good debate that shows how Game is not only valid but a necessary component to not only meeting women but maintain a happy marriage.  I will point out that Game itself is not immoral.  Some aspect such as banging many different hot women may infuriate the moralist in some of you, but before you condemn game, lets condemn the behaviors of women and our society at large, like female sexual promiscuity and no fault divorce that gave rise to the necessity of Game in every man’s life and in every mans marriage.

Personally I like having sex with a variety of attractive women, but I prefer the special connection found only in a monogamous relationship with one woman I can love and trust.  However those women are exceedingly rare.  Because of this I am selective about the woman I have sex with by my choice, not social ineptitude.   Game and my naturally attractive persona give me this ability to not only make this choice but to be choosy.  Without Game I am susceptible to not only falling into beta behaviors in a comfortable monogamous relationship with a woman and thus would encourage the premature end to the relationship, I would only have 2nd or 3rd tier women to choose from or be chosen from.

A good video from a friend of mine about the monies that are transferred from producers (men) to parasites (many women).  Watch the video and check out Terrence Popp’s other videos on You Tube.